[HN Gopher] DuckDuckGo donates $25k to the Perl and Raku Foundation
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DuckDuckGo donates $25k to the Perl and Raku Foundation
        
       Author : oalders
       Score  : 223 points
       Date   : 2024-12-03 15:34 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.perl.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.perl.com)
        
       | jmclnx wrote:
       | As a duckduckgo user, I think this is great. FWIW, Perl is still
       | on my list to learn :)
       | 
       | edit: fixed spelling
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | Regardless of its fame, it is a worthy tool on UNIX
         | environments, even nowadays.
        
           | imglorp wrote:
           | Last I heard, DDG used it in production.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | As does Booking.com, and plenty of sysadmins.
        
           | gtirloni wrote:
           | It's an absolute technical liability to build anything new in
           | Perl these days.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Or not.
             | 
             | I could assert the same about C since Morris Worm, and here
             | we are.
        
             | rurban wrote:
             | It's more of a technical liability to write anything new in
             | Python. All of my old perl code still runs fine, all of my
             | python code went unusable since. It's also extremely
             | bloated.
        
         | forgetfreeman wrote:
         | Perl is maybe the most enjoyable language I've ever coded in up
         | until I'm forced to read someone else's code which is always
         | hellish.
        
           | thwd wrote:
           | It's a write-only language.
        
             | knowitnone wrote:
             | Write Once Read Never(WORN)
        
           | speed_spread wrote:
           | Programming is an individual activity; developing software is
           | a social activity. Current tools and teaching are still
           | biased in favor of the former, resulting in most of our
           | troubles in the latter.
        
           | shagie wrote:
           | As a perl programmer from decades past (I transitioned to
           | Java during the perl 6 winter), I've been finding that groovy
           | and even more recently scala are really nice tools for what
           | I'd have traditionally done in perl.
           | 
           | When doing this year's advent of code, some of the terseness
           | of symbols reminded me of perl.
           | 
           | Perl lost me and I transitioned too far away from its
           | ecosystem professionally to return for more than a dalliance
           | or occasional debugging (
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16219876 ).
        
             | gregw2 wrote:
             | One of my impressions as a Scala newbie coming from a perl
             | background years ago was that Scala practitioners' culture
             | in a corporate setting tended to end up with code bases
             | that reminded me of corporate perl code bases - suffering
             | from "theres more than one way to do it" disease. A bit too
             | easy to be obscure for me to use/recommend it since then
             | despite the nice typing, actors, lazy evaluation, etc. Not
             | sure if this TMTOWTDI Scala resonates with others knowing
             | both or not...
        
               | shagie wrote:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6959326
               | 
               | > Scala feels like the Perl of the modern era: there is
               | more than one way to do it. There is value in that mode
               | of thinking, and Perl is a better language than people
               | give it credit for.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2603425
               | 
               | > This actually is one of my frustrations with Scala, too
               | many right ways to do the same thing. Makes it easier to
               | write but harder to read especially when people have
               | drastically differing styles. One of the advantages of
               | Java is how easy it is to read and use someone else's
               | code since the base language is so limited.
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | The question of company dialects for various languages
               | comes up occasionally. You can see it with people talking
               | about having to learn a new LISP (or Scheme) each time
               | they switch to a different company.
               | 
               | I suspect that flexibility is similar to what is seen in
               | perl, ruby, scala, and groovy.
               | 
               | The TMTOWTDI Scala exists... but I want to say that it is
               | more a reflection of the power of the language (drawing
               | from their LISP heritage). It becomes then a question of
               | how much does the company impose a _consistent_ way of
               | doing it within the company (compare the different
               | company dialects).
        
           | saalweachter wrote:
           | My impression of Perl, as someone who wrote two scripts in it
           | twenty years ago and has been on the Internet since the
           | middle-old days, is that it is a language suited to being
           | clever.
        
             | forgetfreeman wrote:
             | This observation is spot on and 100% of the reason why
             | dealing with other people's code is insufferable. After 20
             | years of coding I can confidently say I'd rather clean out
             | crawlspaces for a living than deal with another "clever"
             | codebase.
        
           | cafard wrote:
           | Most of the someone else's I have read has been in stuff from
           | CPAN, and I recall it as pretty good. I have written some
           | pretty bad Perl, and wish that I had encountered the O'Reilly
           | _Perl Best Practices_ long before I did.
        
           | miohtama wrote:
           | That's why it is called write-only language. Single job
           | scripts, yes. Team work, no.
        
           | cruffle_duffle wrote:
           | > I'm forced to read someone else's code
           | 
           | Which is 85% of the time my own code!
        
       | dweekly wrote:
       | A: This is great! Perl is much maligned but a fantastic Swiss
       | army chainsaw and still runs so much critical infrastructure.
       | 
       | B: I find it concerning that $25k is a notable donation; is the
       | Foundation doing that poorly? I would have hoped this number to
       | have two more digits in it for it to be a front page worthy item.
        
         | autarch wrote:
         | Here's some details about the foundation's financials -
         | https://blogs.perl.org/users/makoto_nozaki/2024/10/understan...
        
           | verelo wrote:
           | So yeah, they're doing rough...
           | 
           | Not sure what the path out here is? Seems like either finding
           | deep pockets that care about their work or some new revenue
           | stream, but without the cash to fund it I'm not sure how.
        
             | portaouflop wrote:
             | Stop doing it for free it the only way, OSS projects that
             | rely on donations almost always do badly economically
        
               | knowitnone wrote:
               | ok. say they charge every user or business $100 a year.
               | that would certainly kill off Perl
        
               | portaouflop wrote:
               | I'm not saying it's practical right now, but yea the
               | death of Perl is the only thing that can make it
               | profitable.
        
             | stevenally wrote:
             | Maybe programmers at companies using Perl get together and
             | raise the issue with management? It is a bargain. Imagine
             | the cost of having to rewrite all that Perl.
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | I don't understand why grant expenses surged in 2023 if
           | revenue was going down.
           | 
           | I wish the Perl foundation good luck.
        
           | infecto wrote:
           | I don't know the dynamics of this board but does anyone else
           | find it strange that the secretary is digging through public
           | documents to generate a post outlining finances? Is that not
           | what the treasurer should be helping with? Then the treasurer
           | makes a public comment to the post? Feels very strange to me.
        
             | autarch wrote:
             | Just to clarify, Dan Wright is the former treasurer. He
             | retired from the TPRF board back in 2020 (https://news.perl
             | foundation.org/post/board_update_tpf_treasu...).
             | 
             | But to answer the bigger question, yes, I think this was a
             | bit weird. I was also on the board for a while, and I think
             | we did not do a good job of reporting on and monitoring
             | financials. This was one of my frustrations with the
             | organization, and part of the reason I stepped down from
             | the board (though there were other, bigger, reasons not
             | related to the board as well).
             | 
             | In fact, I had made the same points as Makoto does in his
             | blog post maybe 1-2 years earlier in a board meeting. We
             | were running a constant deficit and we didn't seem to have
             | a clear plan for what we would do if that continued.
        
         | caseyy wrote:
         | Perhaps it was not meant to be a flashy donation but a medium-
         | sized one. It is still an act of good.
        
         | myrmidon wrote:
         | Regarding B: This tracks with what I've observed in this
         | regard, namely that sponsoring by companies just doesn't work
         | well as business model even for projects where you would assume
         | that it should. The incentives are just not working out, and it
         | seems impossible to mobilize even a fraction of the sums for
         | OSS-donations than what companies _burn_ for much less critical
         | aspects of their operation than OSS tools /libraries/components
         | (or waste outright).
         | 
         | Open source is largely a thing because lots of people
         | voluntarily invest (valuable!) time on their own in my opinion
         | (with corporate sponsorship being almost negligible by
         | comparison).
        
           | that_guy_iain wrote:
           | Most big open-source projects are a thing because a companies
           | invest in it. When we rely on people doing it in their free
           | time what we see is unmaintained software.
           | 
           | The entire idea that open source is volunteer work is largely
           | a myth when it comes to popular open source. Even the ones
           | where you think it's volunteer work they do so much during
           | their working hours that either they're lying to their
           | employer or it's sponsored by their employer.
        
         | gspencley wrote:
         | I'm surprised to learn that Perl is still used. Obviously there
         | will always be legacy code to maintain but these days I can't
         | even remember the last time Perl was mentioned in casual
         | conversation amongst my peers unless we're sharing war stories
         | from the 90s.
         | 
         | These days when we find ourselves needing to write a script our
         | first go-to would be bash, and if we need more features or if
         | it's going to be complex enough to have to worry about
         | maintenance costs we'd probably reach for python.
         | 
         | TIL that there is a non-profit foundation that focuses, in
         | part, on supporting Perl. That surprises me to the same extent
         | that I would be surprised to learn that there is a foundation
         | aimed at supporting VB6 (though now watch someone is going to
         | share that there is).
        
           | lizknope wrote:
           | Most of my coworkers above age 45 still use Perl.
           | 
           | I am constantly parsing reports and then generating commands
           | to run from that. I learned Perl in the 90's and it still
           | works great for that.
           | 
           | I have to code in Tcl for most of our EDA tools (chip design)
           | but I still parse reports in Perl. The younger engineers use
           | Python and I've learned enough but I really don't care. I'm
           | not writing big systems or anything in Perl or Python. It's
           | the Tcl code that has tens of thousands of lines because that
           | is what the tools require.
        
             | cafard wrote:
             | I was about to say, Hey, I use Perl, but then I saw this
             | posting with the over 45 qualification. Yep, that's me (way
             | over).
             | 
             | Honestly, I write about a script a quarter in Perl, but it
             | definitely is handy now and then.
        
               | gertlex wrote:
               | Curious: do you also do script-writing in other
               | languages? And just pull out perl for a subset of
               | problems? Or are most things at the "bigger than a
               | script" level for you?
               | 
               | I'm not here to judge. I still prefer to write my python
               | scripts like it's the 2.7 days... (more effort goes to
               | python "code")
        
               | cafard wrote:
               | Generally, if the script is more than a one-off, I will
               | write in Python, since all the young seem to know Python,
               | and very few seem to know Perl. There are two recurring
               | jobs that I have not rewritten from Perl, one because
               | "pack" is so handy.
               | 
               | The only other language I use much for scripting is
               | Javascript, or rather Jscript, for our accounting
               | department sometimes needs files munged for integration
               | into Great Plains, and I can count on cscript being on
               | the machine and running such scripts.
        
           | leejo wrote:
           | > I'm surprised to learn that Perl is still used.
           | 
           | For this year's London Perl & Raku workshop I shortlisted 70
           | companies to look for sponsorship. That was with minimal
           | research and effort. These ranged from long term ("legacy")
           | users of Perl to startups. From small companies to very large
           | and profitable fintechs. I cover this briefly in the talk I
           | gave at the end of the workshop:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el7qHRpEDeE
           | 
           | Yes, there is far less Perl than there was 20 years ago. But
           | Perl was _everywhere_ at one point, and the halflife of
           | programming languages is long so it 's still in a lot of
           | places. Programming languages don't die, they just stop being
           | talked about in favour of the shiny new ones.
        
             | gspencley wrote:
             | > Programming languages don't die, they just stop being
             | talked about in favour of the shiny new ones.
             | 
             | You're largely preaching to the choir, I don't disagree
             | with anything you said.
             | 
             | As a web application developer who got started
             | professionally in the 1990s, I not only vividly remember
             | Perl being everywhere, I actively wrote a lot of it.
             | 
             | However, in my more recent experience, it is more likely to
             | hear people talk about COBOL, FORTRAN or C++ than it is to
             | discuss Perl. All of those languages predate Perl.
             | 
             | Java also still gets a ton of discussion and it's not shiny
             | and new anymore.
             | 
             | Most of us who spent time writing and maintaining Perl in
             | the 1990s were all too willing to abandon it in favour of
             | other languages with similar features, not because they
             | were shiny and new but because of major pain points with
             | Perl (it earned the meme that it's a write-only language).
             | In my opinion, Perl's greatest contribution and staying
             | power was it's regex engine and syntax which persists.
             | 
             | I don't even like python, for what it's worth, but it's
             | popular for more reasons than it just being "shiny and new"
             | (to the extent that you can even say that about python
             | these days).
        
               | leejo wrote:
               | I don't disagree with anything you've said either, in
               | fact I've blogged about this at length: http://leejo.gith
               | ub.io/2017/12/17/tpc_and_the_end_of_languag...
               | 
               | My main issue is that "People still use Perl?" has
               | essentially become a meme at this point. I'm relatively
               | sure that any sufficiently commented on or upvoted thread
               | on HN gets that statement in it somewhere.
               | 
               | Yes, Perl is still used. Extensively. People and
               | companies just don't talk about it. _That 's_ the problem
               | with Perl these days.
               | 
               | (Personally I think TAP and CPAN were Perl's greatest
               | contributions, as I was never a heavy user of regexp).
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | > People and companies just don't talk about it.
               | 
               | Why not?
        
           | whiplash451 wrote:
           | You'd be surprised to see how much COBOL is still used as
           | well then.
        
           | kqr wrote:
           | In contrast to other people, I'm fairly young (low 30s) and I
           | use Perl a lot. I've outlined my reasoning before[1] but it
           | boils down to (a) very quick to get going, (b) runs everwhere
           | I care about, (c) great compatibility story, and (d) can
           | scale up to large applications in a pinch.
           | 
           | [1]: https://entropicthoughts.com/why-perl
        
           | worik wrote:
           | > these days I can't even remember the last time Perl was
           | mentioned in casual conversation amongst my peers
           | 
           | You need better peers
        
           | markstos wrote:
           | DuckDuckGo is written in Perl. As a business decision, it's
           | cheaper to keep Perl working then replace it.
        
         | dtquad wrote:
         | Plenty of talented developers in Eastern Europe who are $25k or
         | cheaper.
        
           | miroljub wrote:
           | Good luck finding just one talented developer in Eastern
           | Europe willing to work for 25k or cheaper.
           | 
           | Thanks to globalisation, those times are long gone. Any
           | mediocre developer can find a local employer that pays at
           | least that much.
        
         | rglullis wrote:
         | It is mind boggling how much funding there would be for the
         | Gimp/Krita/Inkscape/Penpot developers if every designer gave
         | them 5% of what they give to Adobe.
        
           | miohtama wrote:
           | This is correct and sad.
           | 
           | Open source would be much better with sustainable funding
           | models. But hard to see how this could happen in SaaS
           | dominated modern world.
        
             | rglullis wrote:
             | We "just" need to flip the narrative. Let's stop talking
             | about "services" that people need to pay for and make FOSS
             | something that people invest so they can (collectively) own
             | later.
             | 
             | People love to shit on crypto, but no other industry got so
             | many small-scale, open source projects that got funded when
             | people have high hopes of making bank from it.
             | 
             | I wonder if we could get people to invest in open source
             | projects that were tied to a short position on the
             | proprietary counterpart.
        
             | soygem wrote:
             | It would be better off if people stopped using cuckold
             | licenses like MIT, instead of GPL and its various strains.
        
           | cardanome wrote:
           | They kind of suck at asking for donations.
           | 
           | Look at Wikipedia. They are grossly OVER-funded, they have
           | more money they could ever need in fact And they run purely
           | on donations.
           | 
           | I always wanted to donate for Firefox but they don't offer me
           | an option to do so.
           | 
           | Or look at Gimp: https://www.gimp.org/donating/
           | 
           | Not clear call to action. Lot's of confusion options. Not the
           | best marketing.
        
         | elevation wrote:
         | My sense is that perl deployment is declining as it's replaced
         | with better tools. What infrastructure is perl running?
         | 
         | I started playing with Ubuntu in 2006. Exploring the system,
         | I'd come across system scripts in perl here and there, but
         | Lennart Poettering has gradually displaced these with unit
         | files that are much easier to read.
         | 
         | These days I may invoke perl occasionally. A few years back I
         | used checkconfig.pl to build a slimmed-down kernel config for
         | an embedded board. I expect it will eventually be phased out of
         | these peripheral utilities.
        
         | dale_glass wrote:
         | Perl used to, but I'd say not anymore at this point.
         | 
         | Many of the big Perl names long moved on; CPAN is full of
         | abandoned modules. And the world doesn't sit still.
         | 
         | So as time goes by, there's more and more risk of you finding
         | out that some Perl module you're using no longer works. It may
         | not build because of API changes in the C library, or the API
         | of some web service changed, or there isn't an API at all for
         | some pretty big thing that showed up 3 years ago.
         | 
         | That didn't use to be the case.
        
       | tiffanyh wrote:
       | OT: Craigslist is also built on Perl and hired Larry Wall
       | (creator) years ago.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14345022
        
       | esaym wrote:
       | Craigslist used to donate over $100,000 every single year. Not
       | sure when that stopped. That is really what kept perl going
       | between the years of 2010 and 2016 or so. The board was actually
       | paying a couple of people to do maintenance on the core
       | repository and code. I believe they still do that but obviously
       | due to deficits that is going to get difficult.
       | 
       | It's sad when so many companies are dependent upon perl, but
       | donate nothing. A good case in point is AT&t in the 1980s was
       | broken up into 20 plus different companies. They were then
       | remerged back in the 1990s. But when they merged, they had 20
       | different computer systems and perl was actually used to glue all
       | those systems together and handle data sanitation and ETL
       | pipelines. Yet AT&t never donated anything to perl.
        
         | tyingq wrote:
         | booking.com is, I think, still a heavy Perl user. I don't know
         | to what degree they give back.
        
           | johannes1234321 wrote:
           | At least for a while they had quite a bunch of core perl
           | people on their payroll
        
           | dep_b wrote:
           | It's being phased out quite aggressively there. Turned out
           | they had such a bad reputation for tech debt thru couldn't
           | hire people despite paying +50% median Amsterdam developer
           | salaries.
        
             | that_guy_iain wrote:
             | I think a lot of companies are kind of realising the tech
             | stack they use has a bigger impact on hiring than salaries.
             | I believe banks are encountering this issue with no one
             | wanting to do C++ anymore.
        
               | whiplash451 wrote:
               | You'd find a lot of talented C++ engineers for the right
               | mission and culture.
               | 
               | The problem you describe has little to do with C++ and a
               | lot to do with banking.
        
               | Onavo wrote:
               | The banks just don't pay enough. Quant finance firms in
               | Chicago and wall street don't have this problem.
        
               | that_guy_iain wrote:
               | I am not sure you understand the problem. Your first
               | sentence hints that you know that there needs to be other
               | things than tech stack and salary to find talented C++
               | programmers. But the second sentence pretends like you
               | didn't write the first sentence.
               | 
               | I said tech stack affects hiring more than salary. I
               | didn't say there is a lack of C++ programmers. I was very
               | explicit about my statement.
        
               | psunavy03 wrote:
               | The next 15-20 years are going to be entertaining as the
               | world finally runs out of COBOL developers.
        
               | Philadelphia wrote:
               | It's not really that hard to make new ones.
        
               | philistine wrote:
               | I guess with C++ you either work for a bank or you do
               | video games. Guess which one people prefer?
        
               | IshKebab wrote:
               | Definitely banks! Much better pay (at least in investment
               | banks) and way less stressful.
        
             | hashtag-til wrote:
             | I interviewed with them once. The worst ever interview with
             | incapable rude interviewers, who didn't even know the
             | answer to their questions. They came p with some bizarre
             | offer which I'm glad I declined.
        
           | rmoriz wrote:
           | The founder of Fastly was a Perl release maintainer and core
           | author as well iirc.
        
         | miroljub wrote:
         | And that's the flaw of the open source business model.
         | 
         | You develop something for free, make it available to everyone
         | for free, allow them to modify use and misuse as they wish.
         | Every single step is your conscious decision.
         | 
         | And then, you beg for donations, and complain that people are
         | not donating?
         | 
         | Doesn't make sense. If you don't want to work for free, just
         | charge for it.
        
           | rglullis wrote:
           | Free software is more than just a business model.
        
           | throitallaway wrote:
           | Yeah, I've never thought it compulsory to reimburse for any
           | open source software. Some projects are "lucky" enough to
           | have large corporate contributors/stewards, and others are
           | projects of passion.
           | 
           | Maintenance activities (bug reports, feature additions,
           | participation in community discussions, etc.) should be
           | considered a form of "paying" for OSS - you're giving back
           | and improving the ecosystem. I've done plenty of that for
           | various projects; it's something that I enjoy doing.
        
             | rglullis wrote:
             | It is not "compulsory", but not doing it is extremely
             | short-sighted, like the equivalent of failing the
             | marshmallow test in a collective scale.
        
           | Ologn wrote:
           | Cygnus, Red Hat, MySQL, JBoss etc. all had successful
           | business models.
           | 
           | Android, React and other projects come from companies with
           | mixed business models, but they have had success as well -
           | there are billions of active Android phones, and many web
           | sites running React.
           | 
           | Some open source companies did not do well, but lots of
           | closed source companies do not do well either.
           | 
           | Also, open source is not just a business model - sometimes
           | people just give software they wrote away.
        
           | beernet wrote:
           | Exactly true. This comment being downvoted is a symptom of
           | the unconscious privilege within most of this pink bubble
           | called HN.
        
             | mtmail wrote:
             | Short "Exactly true", "Yes", "I agree" or "+1" comments add
             | little to a discussion and I see those regularly downvoted.
        
               | beernet wrote:
               | I was referring to the comment I replied to being
               | downvoted. That being said, I agree with you, my point
               | still stands though.
        
           | rubyfan wrote:
           | If it was a business model then people would charge, but it's
           | not a business model it's an ideal that leads to a common
           | good.
           | 
           | There are parallels to funding education and scholarship
           | programs in public universities. Corporations often rely on
           | human resources around office locations and they spend in
           | order to ensure a steady flow of talent development. Funding
           | open source is not that different of an issue. One challenge
           | here is IT/Tech departments are often cost centers that are
           | strictly budget controlled and it's harder to make a case for
           | non-essential costs like funding open source.
        
         | sneak wrote:
         | Gifts don't require repayment. Releasing free software is a
         | gift to the world. Corporations don't owe free software
         | maintainers a cent, because people using your software doesn't
         | cost you anything.
        
           | coldbrewed wrote:
           | Open source is a gift within a gift economy. The software may
           | be freely used but the labor needs to come from somewhere,
           | and donations of either direct labor or compensation help
           | ensure that the overall gift economy can continue to
           | function.
        
           | anticorporate wrote:
           | Do they _owe_ anything today, in the sense of a legal
           | obligation? No.
           | 
           | But we've regulated the tragedy of the commons in all sorts
           | of other instances. There's no reason, for example, that a
           | small percentage of corporate income tax couldn't be
           | allocated to a grant program for free and open source
           | software projects.
        
             | badsectoracula wrote:
             | That's a good thought in isolation. The problem however is
             | how are you going to ensure the money collected for that
             | purpose go to the projects that actually need it and there
             | wont be any corruption involved?
             | 
             | It isn't hard to notice, for example, that in EU where
             | gamedev companies often receive grants for various nebulous
             | reasons tend to be companies that do not need the money in
             | the first place (and yes, of course there are devs who
             | received money that needed them, somehow people have to
             | excuse the existence things they benefit from).
        
               | anticorporate wrote:
               | I don't think you're going to solve corruption perfectly
               | in any system, but isn't that a bit of a red herring?
               | 
               | We manage to do this within other fields of endeavor, at
               | least in the United States, by using an intermediary.
               | Examples: National Science Foundation, Corporation for
               | Public Broadcasting, National Endowment for the Arts.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | It's definitely not a red herring. Software is there to
               | do something. Art isn't. If you're spending money on
               | software, it's to do something, and if it's the wrong
               | thing it's a waste of people's money.
        
             | carlosjobim wrote:
             | That's honestly the sneakiest suggestion for implementation
             | of communism I've heard so far in my life. Give away low
             | quality software for free, then later demand that the
             | government force people who want nothing to do with you or
             | your code to pay you for your efforts. It's parasitic on
             | several different levels.
             | 
             | Then all FOSS hackers will be like Khrushchev, wondering
             | why Western industry always outproduced his own, even
             | though the Soviets "where doing everything right".
        
             | creato wrote:
             | > There's no reason
             | 
             | There definitely is a reason, and it's the same reason this
             | problem exists in the first place: it's hard to measure the
             | value a library or tool generates, whether it's open source
             | or not. How are you going to allocate this tax to projects
             | at scale?
             | 
             | Companies already can barely solve this problem internally,
             | and often fail completely at it. Just imagine how many
             | times you read a comment on HN lamenting the lack of
             | investment in IT infrastructure. The idea that you'll solve
             | it at society scale as a government, for things much more
             | nebulous than even IT infrastructure, is laughable.
        
               | anticorporate wrote:
               | Grants don't need to be given on the basis of usage
               | alone. Generally speaking, the people on a grants
               | committee would be knowledgeable industry experts who
               | make allocation based on a number of factors like impact,
               | ability of the organization receiving the funds the
               | utilize them well, the sustainability of the project as a
               | whole, the success of previous grant projects, etc.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | This just creates a cottage industry of people who are
               | good at writing OSS grant applications and demonstrating
               | "progress". It also keeps incumbents in place. Central
               | funding is the worst idea unless there really is no
               | alternative.
        
           | munificent wrote:
           | _> because people using your software doesn't cost you
           | anything._
           | 
           | Tell me you've never been an open source maintainer without
           | telling me you've never been an open source maintainer. :)
        
             | jefftk wrote:
             | I've been an open source maintainer (and still am to a
             | smaller degree) and I think sneak is right. I'm happy for
             | people to use things I create and release, and their use
             | doesn't impose costs on me.
        
               | seam_carver wrote:
               | Tech support still takes time.
        
               | badsectoracula wrote:
               | When you release an open source project you are not
               | obligated to provide tech support.
               | 
               | My project might be given to you for free but if you want
               | my time you'll have to pay for it - and i get to decide
               | if i'll sell it to you.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | Just seeing the issue submissions can have a cost in
               | terms of emotional impact. Of course, you can shield
               | yourself from any feedback, but that has its costs as
               | well (e.g. not getting genuine high-quality error
               | reports). One has to live with those trade-offs.
        
               | jefftk wrote:
               | Tech support is entirely optional, and I only do it to
               | the extent that I enjoy it.
               | 
               | (Or, when at one point I had a job as an open source
               | developer, to the extent that I thought it would improve
               | our software.)
        
               | samus wrote:
               | Their use doesn't, but from time to time they send in bug
               | reports and feature requests, don't they?
               | 
               | Where do you draw the line between extending your project
               | and providing free labor to a for-profit company?
               | 
               | Fixing bugs is less controversial, while finding
               | solutions to issues arising in bespoke production
               | environments, with short deadlines, is grueling work for
               | which companies are usually gladly purchasing support
               | contract. Where is the line past which you ask for money,
               | and are you really fine helping a company avoid lawsuits
               | and brand damage after they neglect updates for years,
               | with no gratitude from their side? Case in point:
               | log4shell in late 2021
        
               | jefftk wrote:
               | _> Where do you draw the line between extending your
               | project and providing free labor to a for-profit
               | company?_
               | 
               | I work on my various projects to the extent that it is
               | fun. If it stops being fun, I don't do it. Making
               | something broadly useful is generally more fun than
               | helping someone with a one-off thing, though that is not
               | my decision criteria.
               | 
               | If someone wants me to do something that isn't fun, they
               | can offer me money, though they will generally need to
               | offer me enough more money than it isn't worth it.
        
               | samus wrote:
               | If you put in work only to the extend that it's fun, then
               | it is probably something with very clearly delineated
               | scope (kudos for sticking to that!) or not really one of
               | the projects that are so critical that companies should
               | be expected to chip in money for support.
        
           | nu11ptr wrote:
           | 100%. This new trend of maintaining or starting an open
           | source project and then getting upset when people don't send
           | you money is seriously weird. If you want compensation, start
           | a company, otherwise consider anything you receive a gift.
        
             | mardifoufs wrote:
             | Yeah, though I have sympathies for single devs or projects
             | like perl that are obviously non profit. Like, I get the
             | frustrations for actual volunteers and people who survive
             | on building OSS at a small scale.
             | 
             | What really annoys me is when someone decides to build a
             | corporation around an open source project, and then you get
             | the usual blog post around users not paying or OSS not
             | being sustainable. Yes, using OSS as your marketing and
             | adoption strategy is probably not very reliable and can
             | cause users to use your OSS as if it was OSS, that is,
             | without giving anything back. But usually those projects
             | succeed because they are OSS, and would've had basically no
             | users otherwise. Who would've used MongoDB, elastic search,
             | or redis if they were proprietary and required a paid
             | license from the get go?
             | 
             | In a way, that's also true in this case (success came from
             | being OSS) but again, I get why it seems unfair for some
             | when it's a non profit not being able to sustain itself or
             | get contributions for corporate users.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | The problem is, if their software had cost what it needed
               | to from the start then that would've put it in a totally
               | different competition with other companies. Bypassing
               | that competition doesn't mean they can suddenly start
               | complaining about how many customers they have vs how
               | much they get.
        
             | graemep wrote:
             | You can also do things like dual licensing.
             | 
             | GPL or Affero GPL plus proprietary license. Of course this
             | puts off outside contributors so not if you want a "bazaar"
             | development mode--but people complaining about this are
             | usually not doing so.
        
         | jimmaswell wrote:
         | I miss Craigslist, seems like everyone moved over to Facebook
         | Marketplace a few years ago.
        
           | benatkin wrote:
           | I still use craigslist and haven't actually done anything
           | with facebook marketplace yet. That makes me want to delete
           | my facebook account (something I've been considering anyway)
           | just to nip that possibility in the bud.
        
             | orev wrote:
             | If you're trying to sell something, you need to be where
             | the customers are. If they're on Marketplace, that's where
             | you go. You can easily list in both places.
        
               | benatkin wrote:
               | Not a good enough reason for me to go back to using
               | Facebook regularly. For others, sure.
        
               | orev wrote:
               | There's no requirement to be actively reading and posting
               | to Facebook in order to use Marketplace.
        
               | elashri wrote:
               | I think a good chunk of people would be worried to
               | buy/sell from/to an account with little to no activity at
               | all. This is very strong signal of low effort spam
               | already common on FB Marketplace.
        
               | turbojet1321 wrote:
               | Marketplace is literally the only reason I still have a
               | facebook account. Unfortunately the alternatives here get
               | nowhere near the same number of buyers.
        
           | VTimofeenko wrote:
           | Anecdata but as a buyer and seller I consistently have had a
           | much better experience on CL. It might be region-specific.
        
         | steve_adams_86 wrote:
         | https://hakai.org uses quite a bit of perl in its various
         | projects! The CTO is very adept with it (really nice guy, too).
        
         | declan_roberts wrote:
         | Craigslist was purchased by ebay in 2004, which is what
         | happened.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | Ebay bought a 25% stake, which it later sold back to them, so
           | only sort of.
        
         | altairprime wrote:
         | It says a lot about how threatened these companies must be:
         | AT&T claims to be profitable, but their infrastructure
         | investment is focused entirely on obstructing competitors.
         | Craigslist used to be a star, but they must be under severe
         | pressure to avoid collapse to have withdrawn ecosystem
         | donations. It says a lot about the fragility of DuckDuckGo that
         | this is all they could commit to Perl, which is really
         | unfortunate; they could have been excellent, but instead their
         | star is apparently diminishing. Oh well.
        
       | revskill wrote:
       | Do perl support typescript ?
        
         | barryrandall wrote:
         | All TypeScript is valid perl if you apply the right regex.
        
       | captn3m0 wrote:
       | Relevant: Zerodha's Floss.fund is giving $1M this year for FOSS
       | projects, and haven't got enough applications. Please apply and
       | share: https://floss.fund/
       | 
       | > FLOSS/fund is dedicated to supporting critical, impactful, and
       | valuable Free/Libre and Open Source projects globally. We give up
       | to $1 million per year to support developers and communities that
       | create and maintain projects, big and small.
        
       | yawaramin wrote:
       | This reminds me of Evan Czaplicki's great talk where he basically
       | traces the funding of most modern programming languages to search
       | engine revenues :-)
       | https://youtu.be/XZ3w_jec1v8?si=zdL6v9P8LnT7Cbal
        
       | tombert wrote:
       | I always forget that DDG is written with Perl, even after I
       | emailed yegg a million years ago asking why they used Perl, and
       | he responded back, which was nice of him.
       | 
       | I hear Raku is fun, I haven't used it, but I sort of swore a soft
       | oath that I would never touch Perl again about a decade ago after
       | having to debug some regex magic someone did. I'm assuming that
       | once you get past the "hump", Perl becomes fun?
        
         | orev wrote:
         | Regex and is a separate language used by many tools, Perl just
         | made it nicely integrated into the language, and also made some
         | nice enhancements. Don't blame issues with regex on Perl.
        
         | SushiHippie wrote:
         | > [...] asking why they used Perl, and he responded back, which
         | was nice of him.
         | 
         | Do you still know what the reason was?
        
           | tombert wrote:
           | I actually still have the email.
           | 
           | Here's what I sent:                   Hello!               I
           | don't have a lot to say to you, but I just wanted to say that
           | about a month ago, I started the transition away from Google,
           | and the most obvious thing to switch was search.
           | DuckDuckGo has improved substantially since the last time I
           | used it (around 2012), and it's to a point where the results
           | are comparable, and sometimes even better than Google, so
           | changing was pretty seamless. Now the only Google-thing I
           | need to remove from my life is YouTube.               As a
           | somewhat technical person, I was curious about one thing; I
           | saw that the primary language for DuckDuckGo is Perl.
           | Without making any judgement here, was there a particular
           | reason for that choice?  Also, are you planning to move to
           | Perl 6?               Anyway, I appreciate you reading my
           | email.  DuckDuckGo is a great service, and I hope you guys
           | keep up the good work!              -Thomas Gebert.
           | 
           | Here was his response:                   Yes, though, the
           | primary language is Perl. It was out of convenience and
           | interest since that was my primary language when I started
           | the project. There was/are a lot of libraries useful for text
           | processing / web crawling. Now Python and other libraries
           | have been similarly built up.
        
             | SushiHippie wrote:
             | Amazing, thanks for sharing!
             | 
             | What year was this? (I'm Curious, as you mentioned 2012 was
             | the last year you used at the time of the E-Mail)
        
               | tombert wrote:
               | It's actually more recent than I thought, looks like it
               | was 2018. I would have sworn it was earlier but I can see
               | the "sent" timestamp on ProtonMail.
        
               | SushiHippie wrote:
               | 2018 is still a long time ago, so that's totally
               | understandable haha
               | 
               | Thank you!
        
         | hnisoss wrote:
         | It s just a lang like any other. Even ASM you can write fairly
         | easily if you do it for years. Raku is quite damn cool, you
         | should check it out a bit. As felix[1] said, it realy is
         | something like bash and python having a cool cousin.
         | 
         | [1] https://felix-knorr.net/posts/2023-06-24-raku-is-
         | awesome.htm...
        
         | sigzero wrote:
         | Raku is Perl on steroids "basically". It is still pretty slow
         | the last I read something on it. I always enjoyed Perl even as
         | a beginner.
        
       | ricardo81 wrote:
       | Good for them. They don't have to but they chose to.
       | 
       | What they have done (perform around 100M searches a day) is
       | phenomenal. Testament to their marketing.
       | 
       | Unfortunately as a search engine, it's still just a skin of
       | another one, with some additional small scale projects attached.
       | 
       | It's slightly surprising that DDG hasn't attempted to become a
       | 'real' search engine, rather than being a meta. At the moment
       | they make a subset of Bing's revenue per search, never mind what
       | Google make.
        
       | shrubble wrote:
       | Another post in the thread mentions ATT; I can confirm that at
       | another large telecom, Perl is still used in quite a few places,
       | and is still being used for some new projects as well.
        
         | oalders wrote:
         | If you don't mind sharing this info, I'd love to hear about it.
         | :) I'm olaf@perlfoundation.org
        
       | handzhiev wrote:
       | Genuine question: is someone starting projects in Perl/Raku? If
       | yes, what made you choose it?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-03 23:00 UTC)