I prefer good faith discussions please. I love the Fediverse and love what it can be long term. The problem is that parts of the culture want nothing to do with financial aspect. Many are opposed to ads, memberships, sponsorships etc The “small instances” response does nothing to positively contribute to the conversation. There are already massive instances and not everyone wants to self host. People are concerned with larger companies coming to the Fedi but these beliefs will drive everyday users to those instances. People don’t like feeling disposable and when you hamstring admins who then ultimately shut down their instances that’s exactly how people end up feeling. There has to be an ethical way of going about this. So many people were too hard just to be told “too bad” “small instances” I don’t want to end up with a Fediverse ran by corporations because they can provide stability.

  • fubo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’d suggest the “complex internal politics, manager layers, architects” – and the fancy offices, cafeterias, and other amenities – are actually quite a lot more expensive than the developers.

    But don’t underestimate ads, and things that are similar to ads. In competitive markets, ads are really expensive, because ads are rivalrous. Venture A has to outbid Venture B for ad placement. The same sort of logic goes for hiring, especially hiring of trend-driven fields like project management. (“I’m a Scrum Master, who are you, a scum master?”)

    • alvvayson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree.

      In terms of things that make capitalistic IT expensive, #1 would be the profit extracted by shareholders (either directly or through licensing schemes) , #2 would be the layer of highly paid “very important people” and then #3 would be developer cost.

      • fubo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        One note: It’s pretty rare for tech companies to directly issue profits to shareholders (i.e. as dividends). Rather, profits are usually reinvested into expanding the company; and shareholders make money by selling shares that have risen in value.

        • alvvayson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh… Tech companies do some of the biggest stock buybacks, which is a transfer of profits to shareholders.

          But yes, they also reinvest money.