--=-53/VC+sNtRcNoFJiIwKz
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 00:14, Daniel Wolstenholme wrote:
> Do you even work as a software engineer?  This idea that Free

Last time I checked yes.

> software is going to somehow obsolete paid software is so
> ridiculous, I only expect to hear it from Microsoft astroturfers
> trying to FUD people into believing that programming for free
> puts people out of work.

I suppose telling someone who puts more work hours and writes more code
assigned to the Free Software Foundation than he does for his day job,
that he is a Microsoft astroturf is an astute judgement?

> 95% of paid software development is done for in-house work.=20

This is called custom software (not propeitary (or in your terms paid))

> Only a tiny fraction is sold to other people.  And of that, not
> that much is of interest to Free software developers.  The only

I think this is partially true, but those that are writing extremely
custom software likely aren't being displaced in mass volume by off
shore development.  Mostly because if it is that custom its a
competitive advantage and most firms wont ship their "intellectual
property" overseas.

> people who won't be writing software anymore if Free software
> takes over the world will be those currently employed at
> Microsoft, Corel, McAfee, Symantec, and hopefully Adobe.  Some

It will come in waves.  The infrastructure engineers are already
threatened (web server, operating systems, firewall, etc)  The
productivity groups are next (office, virus, groupware, graphics,
desktop)

> software engineers that won't be displaced any time soon are
> working at places like Synopsys, Cadence, MentorGraphics, SAP,
> SAS, etc.  Don't forget all the game developers at ID software,

I disagree or at least maybe our definitions of any time soon are
different.  I see SAP and SAS as the next targets for free software.  In
fact, the very project I maintain is aimed to target SAP in the next 3
or so years.

> Sony, Nintendo, etc.  And lastly, the other 95% of programmers
> working at non-software companies writing software that has
> absolutely no use outside the company.  Computers wouldn't

I am not sure the 'no use outside company' is very valid.  Generally it
holds weight for one of two reasons.

1. It is highly 'secretive' and/or 'limited in scope' in nature (I think
ESR uses lumber cutting software as an example)
2. It is poorly authored.

I think a lot of it is #2.  As good Free Software becomes more common
place it will be more likely people will pick up what exists and
slightly modify rather than re-invent the wheel (which is what I was
talking about)  Those in position #1 wont off shore, because they want
to 'protect' their market.

> be very useful if people and companies couldn't write their own
> custom applications for them.  Free software is best for
> providing components that are universally needed, like operating
> systems, office suites, web browsers, web servers, etc.

I am hard pressed to find too many areas where Free Software doesnt make
sense.  I remember 5 years ago people told me I wouldnt ever have a Free
Software office suite that could come close to MS Office.  Now I have
Open Office which I think is better.  They told me I would never have a
Quicken replacement, GNUCash while far from perfect removed the quicken
dependency.  I could go on and on.  Surely we could debate for ever, but
time will tell.

> But the problem is that the overseas outsourcing threatens to
> replace much of the custom programming that is done by the
> low-visibility 95%.  It also threatens to replace a lot of

We can agree to disagree. I think that a large portion of this "custom"
work will really equate to cobbling free solutions together with glue.=20
You think that it will remain custom.  There is little need to debate it
more.

> electrical engineering work (HDL design mostly) done in this=20
> country.  The situation really sucks too (except for the
> libertarians that are all for competition without any rules to
> level the playing field), because it's impossible for someone
> living in the U.S. to compete with someone in India because the
> cost of living is so much lower there.  You could do better

As much as I hate corporations couldnt you argue, is it really fair that
corporations have to pay over priced hacks $250/hr to get work done that
people are willing to do twice as fast for $7/hr?  I firmly believe the
IT industry at large created some of this problem by GOUGING.  Read a
thread from a year ago on here, where I said consulting at $125/hr
seemed insane.  Nearly everyone on the list lynched me stating how you
had account for not having work and training etc etc...  Basically it
boiled down to gaming the clock so you bill high enough to only have to
work 6months a year to live just in case.  Now people are pissed that
economy is in the crapper and companies are looking for alternatives.

> working at McDonald's than working at their rates.  This is bad
> for two reasons:
>=20
> 1) It takes a lot of money out of this country, and puts a lot
> of software engineers out of work.  To me, this is a lot worse
> than when companies were outsourcing their manual labor
> overseas; it's not that hard for an unskilled laborer to get
> another unskilled job, or better yet to learn some skills or a
> trade and get a better job.  It's a lot harder when you have 4-8
> years of college and possibly postgraduate education to just
> switch to a different career path.

So if it doesnt effect you its not a problem?  If you lose your job it
is?  Remember no one forced you to go to school to be a software
engineer.  Most graduates were choosing it as a degree because it 'paid
well'.  I would say teachers get a pretty raw deal, but people continue
to graduate to be teachers.  Most of the teachers I know are MBA's and
get paid well under 30,000k a year.  So your MBA is more valuable than
theirs because????

> 2) It removes all incentive for young people to go into
> engineering, or to learn science and math, as people have been
> whining about in this country for years.  In fact, at my own
> company, the execs talk a lot in the press about encouraging
> children to study science and math, and encourage us engineers
> to go to schools to encourage kids to become engineers.  At the
> same time, they tell us flat-out in department meetings that
> they plan to open up more development centers in Bangalore
> because they cost so much less than we do.  Now why would I want
> to tell kids to go into this field when I've just been told they
> don't want to hire any more people in this country in the
> future?

Um so we want to teach our children. Only be interested in education
cause it can make you rich?  You might as well teach them how to produce
porn, it likely is far more lucrative than any degree will earn you.

> Now why does it cost so much less to live in India anyway, than
> in first-world countries like the U.S., the EU countries, or
> Japan?  Well, we have a lot of nice benefits in these countries,
> like paved roads, police who don't overtly ask for bribes,
> health care for the poor (though the US could do a little better
> here), good sanitation, low pollution, and all kinds of laws and
> government framework which keep these things in place.

And here I thought it was just because they didnt have to carry a tax
system that spends several hundred billion dollars to finance its head
of state's war on terror fetish. (yes this is a political jab not aimed
directly at this debate)

> Of course, the counter-argument is that, over time, with more
> such investment from the West, that India's standard of living
> will rise, and its cost of living accordingly, so that things
> are more equivalent.  By most accounts, India has improved
> greatly over its first 50 years of independence.  But how long
> will this take? Another 50 years?  In the meantime, how do we
> avoid becoming a tech backwater by outsourcing all our
> technology work elsewhere because it saves money in the short
> term?  How do we encourage the next generation of knowledge

Technically if the technology is cheaper, those industries using it are
saving money, if they are saving money the cost of their product goes
down or the production of it goes up, which means economic benefit for
those using it.  I think you are only looking at one side of the
equation, because you are directly affected by that side.

> workers to become knowledge workers instead of something else?=20
> Some other people mentioned the project leads and programming
> gurus staying here, and directing development overseas.  Well,
> that might work for 5-10 years, until those people retire.  Then
> where do their replacements come from?  We're already seeing a
> huge problem in the U.S. space program where all the experienced
> engineers are on the verge of retirement, and no one's bothered
> to follow their path because it's been such a poor career
> choice.  How exactly do we plan to build a successor to the
> Space Shuttle with no competent engineers around?

You really think the space program is in that much danger?

> What's the answer for people currently working as software
> engineers?  I have no idea.  But I can't recommend this field
> for anyone who's still in school.  There's fields out there with
> much better long-term potential, such as biotech and
> pharmaceuticals.

I tell and will always tell kids, do what you love.  If you LOVE
computers, pursue it.  Whether it pays what mc donalds pays or whether
it pays what a professional basketball player makes.  Because in the
end, there is more to life than money.

Most people work all their life trying gain money, so they can retire to
do what they love.  Why not avoid obsessing on money and instead do what
you love before you retire. ;)


--=20
Derek Neighbors
GNU Enterprise
http://www.gnuenterprise.org
derek@gnue.org

Was I helpful?  Let others know:
 http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=3Ddneighbo

--=-53/VC+sNtRcNoFJiIwKz
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA+cD3XHb99+vQX/88RAnctAKCZQZ47C0n+yyTos3GDIWegMTH+qwCfeude
KXKY/VwpeUzqr1loDzrpWIw=
=U6q9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-53/VC+sNtRcNoFJiIwKz--