ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

(Hypothetical): If DC Grouped Together...What could be achieved?

<< < (3/6) > >>

I've been thinking off and on about Doco2 for quite some time now.. Some of those ideas are solidifying (using Mewlo as the foundation) while others remain in flux..  If people are interested what I could do is write up 5-10 pages on what I think it would look like -- a proposal of sorts.

I occasionally have the unrealistic fantasy that groups like this one can put together a project that would provide incomes for the members who participate.  Sort of like using our talents/passions/skills to free us from perhaps our normal methods of making a living, which may be less than satisfying.  But these kinds of ideas never seem to really take off, and instead turn into soon to be abandoned open source projects.

I would be very interested if any such project was able to generate additional income for participants in a good way.
-superboyac (October 25, 2014, 08:18 PM)
--- End quote ---

That concept seems attractive.  I've never participated in anything like that where the "workers" for want of a better term, started the "company."  Therefore I have no idea how it would be funded.  Who would want to invest and why etc..

I figure I have about zero chance of a hire in the IT industry if I am to believe all that about an IT guy over 30 being over the hill.  But I have to wonder how something could be set in motion on a paid basis.  IOW people performing tasks at some salary and perhaps some incentive if there is a "profit" involved at some point.  Otherwise if it is along the lines of "let's start making something and hope we can sell it" then I think it will end up being unpaid effort shortly abandoned.  The Super Group Blind Faith at least produced one album before they expired.  :)

Overall, this is probably one of the most depressing threads I've read in a long time.  :(

I'm not a coder. But I am a musician. And if musicians (as a collective) can routinely gather "fiercely independent personalities" (including the occasional hyper-talented albeit bona fide sociopath) to collaborate on artistically valid, and financially remunerative projects...I'm wondering why coders can't do the same?

Is this 'problem' real? Or is it just something coders have programmed themselves to believe? :huh:

Is this 'problem' real? Or is it just something coders have programmed themselves to believe?
-40hz (October 26, 2014, 08:29 AM)
--- End quote ---

There is a difference, I think.  

From my experience, in the case of musicians, because of the creative and instinctual nature, and the very real underlying rules of rhythm and music theory, you start with that basis and move on from it.  It can be a painful process with independent personalities and such- but there is very real common ground.

With development, that foundation has to be laid.  A bad design and bad architecture can kill an entire project from the beginning... but it spends a lot of time and energy in dying.  It's not for a lack of wanting to, and I think there is nothing bad in trying.  But there really needs to be a guiding force or somethings laid out from the beginning that are not likely to be.

Look at the coding jams and such- they're more gimmicky than anything, producing things, but none of them being really lucrative or even finished.  Sometimes they are the building blocks of something else to come along later.  But more often, they are forgotten, swept aside, and never reach fruition.

For programming projects, more than music, there are roles for a reason, as much as I hate the structure.  You need a champion/project owner that has the vision that people submit to... and everything is measured against that vision- and you have his development side- the architect/designer.  Then the project managers that keep it rolling along.  I always like to separate testing from anything else... but some disagree on that point too.  Then user acceptance... which goes back to the project owner.  As much as I hate it... it works.  And without it, I've seen commercial projects fail terribly.

You need a champion/project owner that has the vision that people submit to... and everything is measured against that vision- and you have his development side- the architect/designer.
-wraith808 (October 26, 2014, 09:37 AM)
--- End quote ---


I never realized coding projects invariably need an 'overlord' to get them to work. Or that every project needed to start from a completely bank page if I understand you correctly. Seems almost inefficient by design.

I always thought there were enough coding standards, documented "best practices" and development models that, by now, the days of starting with a a completely empty whiteboard wasn't a given. But I'm not a coder. The few real dev projects I was involved with go back before "objects" and the web. They involved several individuals, and getting everybody on the same page wasn't a challenge. We knew what needed to be done, what the deadlines were, who was best qualified for which roles and pieces, and it went from there to successful conclusions.

Apparently things have changed somewhat over the years. (Read Tracy Kidder's book Soul of a New Machine for a good write-up of how things worked back in the day.) Today it seems more like people are jockeying for who's gonna be (resentfully) acknowledged as "Chief Pecker" in the neighborhood boy's club than anything else.

But maybe that's just me looking at it from the perspective of a former insider who is now an outsider? :huh:


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version