This paid vs open source thing is silly. They are not antonyms. You can still charge for an open source app. But being open source would make it user auditable so that we know what they are doing with our data.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 8 points 1 year ago

It's true. I just view it as a donation or a convenience fee for not having to build the app yourself from source.

[–] WiildFiire@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sync dev has made it incredibly clear what data is being recorded and it's only because of Google ads

[–] raptir@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The point is that with a closed source app your only support for that statement is trust in the developer, while if it was open source we would actually be able to confirm that.

[–] godless@feddit.de -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If it's open source, the developer can't monetize it. Everyone will just be able to remove ads and compile it from scratch.

FOSS is all fine and dandy, unless being a developer for a popular service (or app) is your sole source of income.

[–] raptir@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

That's just not what really happens though. Look at Robert Broglia's emulators. They are open source and paid, and are some of the most popular paid emulators on the play store despite the fact that people could just download the source from his site and compile them.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bruh I dont care what sort of sauce it has I dont want to compile, it what the fuck. You can have my money, just pipe the memes into my cerebral cortex.

[–] MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Yup. Enable my doomscrolling habit = take my money.