It is a rather convenient position to have the taxpayer keeping care of your bill, but not everyone is in this pleasant position. Norway has enough oil (yet) to fund you at this time, but you should try - at least for a while - to work in the industry, just a bit, to see the other side of the medal.
I have worked in projects with commercial companies, it also part of the job when developing standards and reference implementations. Luckily, today, most relevant companies base their activities on open sources technologies, and many companies have it as policy to participate in developing open standards and use open source. Closed source of course exists, but as building block for making solid products and platforms, it is dwindling, and dwindling faster every year. Open source conferences are growing larger and larger every year, and these days almost every major industry player participate, to show off their open source products and look for customers, cooperations and potential new hires. Also in non-open source conferences (for example SNIA events), open source solutions are becoming more and more the norm. It doesn't matter what you think or say, the trends are clear, the industry is moving, albeit slowly at times.
I've done both, actually. Currently, I'm pretty much in the same position as you right now (so I'm happy), but I'm not as arrogant as you to state that closed source development has to be damned.
I am not saying it has to be damned, I am saying it _will_ be damned, and there is nothing you can do about it. To pretend this is not the case is rather ignorant.
I believe a good software engineer should be able to make a living (which you cannot, in Amiga land, let's face it, even less with users like you), and not a living from the taxpayer but from his customers.
If you want to survive as a good software engineer these days, you make sure that your creations are open source so that your customers - both those who paid, and those who just picked it up - can participate and improve the product, or you can pretty much wave your chances bye-bye. Your customers will more and more pick other options. I know, because I am a customer.
Both development models have their drawbacks and merrits. Pick the one that suits your case best. As far as public positions are concerned, we're here clearly stating that the tax payer paid for it, so should have access to it. That's fair, too.
It is really more a matter of economy than it is about development models - working with closed source within a company and working with open source with a community is not _that_ different as far as development models are concerned.
But that does not mean that I ignore the need for people to create closed source software; its development is often quicker and driven by the market, not by some abstract funding goals you'll get from the latest university project.
Your views on how things work around here are a bit skewed, but then again, I never met anyone happily working for DFN :laughing:
It's a much harder life in private industry, and I would wish you could appreciate that at some point when you grow older and wiser. You should have done that to appreciate how hard work has to go into products compared to the cozy job you have.
I appreciate hard work when I see it. I appreciate hood products when I use them. So far though, "the industry" you speak of is way too busy creating crapware with tons of insane limitations, lacking interoperability, crazy licensing schemes etc. There is really very little to appreciate.
This being said, I'm really set up by how arrogantly you deny the choices of the original authors. *This* makes me mad. Not the usual sales talk on Open Source - that's just a choice of your business model and I'm fine with whatever fits your needs. There are markets where open source works, and others where it does not.
I do not deny anyone to make dumbass choices, but I am to old to just let such nonsense pass as "the right thing to do".
And please - name one market where open source does not work.
