The future of KGS

[deja]

Just to clear the air IF needed.

Joaz and I view the world from very different (perhaps diametrically opposed) philosophical perspectives. I think we understand each other fairly well and I more than welcome his thoughts and comments in opposition to mine. I quite enjoy the jousting. And while hyperpape is correct on the misuse of "fallacy," I took Joaz's meaning within the context of his post and had some fun with it.

Anyway, the deeper we get into such perspectives the more likely we'll trespass on the rule against political discussion. So perhaps we'll have to carry on our discussion in code, which is sort of what I was already doing and Joaz called me on it in rather terse fashion - not a problem for me.

@Bonobo - if you're referring the word "shibboleth," it doesn't necessarily have a negative connotation. Nevertheless, I did intend for it to be understood as defined by Merriam-Webster's 1st entry:

"a word or saying used by adherents of a party, sect, or belief and usually regarded by others as empty of real meaning."

I stand by my intended use.

[Bonobo]

I guess the difference is between “self-inflicted” obligations and those obligations the audience thinks a creator has.

For example: Do we think the Rolling Stones have any obligation to play “Satisfaction” on every gig? (Do they actually still give concerts?)



And this:

[..]

@Bonobo - if you're referring the word "shibboleth," [..]

No, I meant JB’s use of “socialist fallacy”. The ToS says somewhere that it’s forbidden to post things that could trigger a political discussion here. Something like that.

[hyperpape]

Are you kidding? The Rolling Stones will still be giving concerts when they have to reanimate the bodies of the band...

[Pippen]

I wondering if the great dictator^^ gave any indication of when to expect the new coded KGS or at least its beta version.

[Bantari]

Let me just quickly touch on few of the good points you are making.

Perhaps I could have agreed with all this a few months ago, but I can't now. Stone sounds are one thing, but the lag is so bad nowadays that I barely use KGS any more, and when I do I lose my games on time!

Again - good arguments. I have no problem with that.
But all they say is that, maybe, KGS outlived its usefulness, or wms is tired, or working on something else, or whatever.

This says absolutely nothing to me about the fat that, in my opinion, wms does not have any obligation to cater to us forever and ever.

I am a very strong proponent of open-source and/or free everything, which means not only that I realise the value of getting things for free, but also that I realise the power that creating things for free can have within a community.

Well, I am not.
Maybe I am old, but I think that each thing you get for free is a gift, not your right. And you don't get to *demand* that everything you get is free. Ultimately, if everything was free and open-source, we would either have nothing or we would be constantly bombarded with ads or whatnot. Just look at the way TV has gone - 5 min of stupid ads every 5 min - but that's the price for being able to watch 'quality' content for 'free' (or at least very cheap.) I can't even imagine the long term damage it does to society.

You think kibitz is bad on KGS now? Wait until they have popup-ads ever few sec... Because ultimately this is the price for getting things 'free'.

People need to make money, in the long run, and expecting everything you want to be given you for free is not realistic, I think. Even if I agree - it would be *very* nice.

But the only viable long-term model for offering free stuff that I can see if you charge for your main products and offer side-products for free as a marketing gimmick. Or you rely on constant donation - which sort-of makes things 'non-free' but only means that you are happy with somebody else paying for your stuff. But, as you say - this is a discussion for another thread.

So - Should wms open-source KGS? Yeah, would be great if he did!
Is he obliged to do so? I don't think so.
Is he a villain if he doesn't? I don't think so either.

If only I was a better coder, I would very happily put time and effort into open-source projects like this myself (and those aren't entirely empty words - I'm actively working towards being a better coder in my limited spare time). But there's no point in talking about things that I haven't done, and this is a discussion for another thread anyway.

Well, I am a good enough coder to write a good go server, as are many others. Its not that hard, really. But will I do it? Seeing how I will then be expected to work as a slave for free for god knows how long, as long as the community's whim demands, I guess... getting nothing buy lip from a bunch of ungrateful users just because I am not fast enough to implement this or that 'special feature'... No, thanks! I will definitely not do that! And I am beginning to wonder about the sanity of those who do.

I also have the skill to run a core team of developers to work on open-source projects. This is an even harder and more demanding job than actually coding the thing yourself. But I will not do that either - for the same reasons. Ultimately, no matter how great a job you do, they want more until you can't give no more, and so you're left there standing like a fool with everyone pointing fingers and hating your guts. Just look what happens with KGS. Call me crazy but count me out.

Look... I understand the reasons for open-source and free stuff, and all that good things. But in many cases this is not very realistic, even if possible. This is one reason I was so hell-bent on asking about Kaya's business model, and why I was reluctant to lend a helping hand as long as they kept brushing this question aside and unimportant.

If you really expect people to work very hard *for your pleasure* for years or until you get bored with what they do, and then they should bend over backwards and give you all their work *for free* so you can try to find some other sucker to take over and keep forking hard *for your pleasure* - because this is what you are basically saying. And what else you are saying is that the person who worked hard for years *for your pleasure* does not even deserve a "thank you" but is somehow obliged to bend over backwards now... I just don't know, dude. I can't agree with that.

[hyperpape]

I wondering if the great dictator^^ gave any indication of when to expect the new coded KGS or at least its beta version.

He said he was taking five weeks, and we're a week or two in, maybe? So I expect that it'll either drop in a few weeks, or it'll be very unclear when it will drop.

[Bantari]

I wasn't around when he did, but he did, implicitly. As soon as you agreed with him that a good western go server was necessary and important, on whatever level, and whether that was before or after he had created KGS, you tacitly consented to the fact that he was the one fulfilling this necessary and important role.

Well, I *was* there at that time, and I don't think what you say is right.
We had at least two western Go servers back then, IGS and NNGS, both running well, one still active. You could argue that NNGS was created out of the need of the community of people disappointed at how IGS was run, but that's another story. There was certainly no pressing need for another western Go server that I could see. The IGS/NNGS combo looked well since you could use the same client for both, which was neat.

KGS came as a surprise to me, and I bet to many others as well. It was not successful because if was so badly needed - but because it was slightly better than NNGS. It was just a slightly more shiny toy on your shelf, gifted to you unexpectedly.

But - even if what you said was true, I still strongly disagree.
Are Tygem owners, for example, obliged to you to run Tygem for ever and ever as long as it pleases you? Are the IGS creators? Would Kaya owners have obligation to you? Is Jordus obliged to you to come and fix L19 lag issue? After all - it has been going for over 4 *months* now...

How about you? Would *you* have any obligations? Or its all one-sided?
Does the community has obligations to anybody? To all the creators and maintainers of all the wonderful toys the community uses? Or is all the obligation on the part of those who give you the toys you like so much?

You can see everything in the same light. Consider this:
I (Bantari) write posts on L19 that amuse you or educate you or just give you an outlet for discussion. You like it. Am I obliged to do that as long as it pleases you? By extension - this is what you are saying: I am giving you something for free, one could argue there is need for it in the community (without people like me who post here there would be no L19, for example) - so are we all obliged to post here? Are you? Should we be called some bad names if we stop posting?

I know its a weird way of looking at it, but at its core its the same thing - I do something which benefits (or not) the community, the community needs it, and I do it for free. So, according to what you say - I have obligations to you or to the community now. And I say - that's BS. I have no obligation to you, dude.

[HermanHiddema]

He said he was taking five weeks, and we're a week or two in, maybe? So I expect that it'll either drop in a few weeks, or it'll be very unclear when it will drop.

There's regular updates on the progress here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/108736506961432085848/posts

[billywoods]

This says absolutely nothing to me about the fat that, in my opinion, wms does not have any obligation to cater to us forever and ever.

I agree completely. However, at the point at which the developer of a project gets tired of running it, I believe that they should hand it over, if it's of any importance. Otherwise, did they really care about it?

And you don't get to *demand* that everything you get is free. Ultimately, if everything was free and open-source, we would either have nothing or we would be constantly bombarded with ads or whatnot. Just look at the way TV has gone - 5 min of stupid ads every 5 min - but that's the price for being able to watch 'quality' content for 'free' (or at least very cheap.) I can't even imagine the long term damage it does to society.

I also agree that I don't get to demand anything. Indeed, I hope for communities in which everyone gives to everyone else for free and for the love of it, but they're rare.

With respect, TV is a terrible example, because it's nothing but a money-making scheme, which KGS really isn't; perhaps, in the interests of fairness, let's also compare things like Linux to Windows, or Open/LibreOffice to MS Office? How good are they? How much in the way of adverts do they have? Are they financially self-supporting? I'm sure you see what I'm getting at.

I am a good enough coder to write a good go server, as are many others. Its not that hard, really. But will I do it? Seeing how I will then be expected to work as a slave for free for god knows how long, as long as the community's whim demands, I guess... getting nothing buy lip from a bunch of ungrateful users just because I am not fast enough to implement this or that 'special feature'... No, thanks!

Again, I completely agree.

I also have the skill to run a core team of developers to work on open-source projects. This is an even harder and more demanding job than actually coding the thing yourself. But I will not do that either - for the same reasons. Ultimately, no matter how great a job you do, they want more until you can't give no more, and so you're left there standing like a fool with everyone pointing fingers and hating your guts.

This is where I think you're wrong. How much management do you really think an open source go server would need? How much maintenance and upkeep would you really need to bother with to make sure the stones kept clicking? A huge project might be very different, but there's only so much a go server can do, and its complexity is severely limited. An open source go server would need a huge initial push (for maybe a couple of weeks to a couple of months, depending on how many coders there were) until the foundations were coded, and trivial amounts of work from then on. Better yet, the community would have no one to complain to - if you want a feature, code it yourself.

And what else you are saying is that the person who worked hard for years *for your pleasure* does not even deserve a "thank you"

I'm not saying that at all. I am thankful for every good game I've ever played, every bug that's ever been fixed, and so on. But that's all in the past. It's not particularly clear to me who I should be thanking and what for right now. Due to all the bugs I'm encountering lately, if KGS disappeared off the map today, I wouldn't notice for a month.

[Bantari]

I dunno, but it looks to me as some people consider it their *right* rather than their *privilege* to have a functioning Go server to play on.

From what billywood says, it might be those people don't know the IGS wars we have been through in the past, and maybe this is what clouds their attitudes. All they know is KGS which has always been there, always free, always ready, and always with lots of players. So they started taking it for granted - until at some point they started to think about it as their *right* and the creators like wms as being *obliged* to them to keep things going in perpetuity.

To me, this is a very strange attitude.
But maybe I can understand how this overwhelming feeling of 'entitlement' appeared.

Or maybe I don't understand.
Is this a generation gap? Some new-age thing, when people expect it all, and free, and so they just take take take, and the whole world owes them big?

I am feeling old now... heh.
But I still disagree with such attitudes.
Oh - and get off my darned lawn, you young whippersnappers!

[Bantari]

I also have the skill to run a core team of developers to work on open-source projects. This is an even harder and more demanding job than actually coding the thing yourself. But I will not do that either - for the same reasons. Ultimately, no matter how great a job you do, they want more until you can't give no more, and so you're left there standing like a fool with everyone pointing fingers and hating your guts.

This is where I think you're wrong. How much management do you really think an open source go server would need? How much maintenance and upkeep would you really need to bother with to make sure the stones kept clicking?

A huge project might be very different, but there's only so much a go server can do, and its complexity is severely limited. An open source go server would need a huge initial push (for maybe a couple of weeks to a couple of months, depending on how many coders there were) until the foundations were coded, and trivial amounts of work from then on. Better yet, the community would have no one to complain to - if you want a feature, code it yourself.

Trust me - I have 3 projects running right now, each about the size of KGS (possibly slightly smaller, but not much) and each having only a handful of users to ask for new features and fixes. And each of the project is pretty mature now - running some 3 years or so. And there is sometimes not enough hours in a day for me to implement all that is asked for - often *demanded*. Maybe the problem is that I am the only one doing that job... but on the other hand I am well paid for that, so that evens out. Bottom line is - there is a *Lot* of work making sure complex projects run and are maintained and new features added. Even for a team of programmers it would not be an easy job - especially if they were all working for free, after hours and sharing the time with others stuff like families and life.

And what you don't understand that working in a team, especially on open-source project, opens its own *huge* can of worms. Its actually often much easier to have full control, even working alone, than maintaining a coherent open-source community-driven project. I bet this is why wms does what he does.

But feel free to start your own project. You do not need to be a great programmer to do that - its open-source, after all, so people will flock in droves to write good code for it, the whole community will contribute! You just need to guide. Maybe experience will open your eyes.

But sure, stone clicking sound should have been fixed. No argument here. And I hope it will be, eventually. Or maybe a new client will come. Or maybe a new server, who knows.

And what else you are saying is that the person who worked hard for years *for your pleasure* does not even deserve a "thank you"

I'm not saying that at all. I am thankful for every good game I've ever played, every bug that's ever been fixed, and so on. But that's all in the past. It's not particularly clear to me who I should be thanking and what for right now. Due to all the bugs I'm encountering lately, if KGS disappeared off the map today, I wouldn't notice for a month.

I would say - be thankful for all the hard work people are doing for years and years on your behalf for free, just so you can have fun - also for free. Right now KGS struggles, for whatever reasons. Maybe it will soon die, for whatever reason. And maybe you don't care... Well - I do. Even if I don't play on KGS much these days, it was a great ride and I will always remember fondly. And I will always be grateful for the years we had. And if KGS picks itself up and fixes its current issues, I will be very glad.

But ok... so as long as things go good, you are thankful. The moment something goes not to your liking you toss it out the window. I don't like such attitude, but I can accept that this is how you feel. Not sure what else to say...

[billywoods]

Would *you* have any obligations? Or its all one-sided?

I'm not sure what you're saying here. If I created something awesome that other people grew to depend on, for good reasons or bad, and I got bored of it, I would offer it up to the crowd. In fact, I'd feel terrible if I didn't. If I created something, it's because I thought it was a great thing to create; if other people used it, it's because they agreed with me; why would I suddenly change my mind, abandon it, refuse to let anyone else pick it up, and let it go to waste? What kind of person gives something to a community, calling it a "gift", and then essentially takes it away again through negligence? That seems really counterintuitive and wasteful to me, and yes, I am bound by all of the same obligations.

I hope that this implicitly answers your examples, and shows why I think there's a difference between Tygem and your posts.

Is this a generation gap? Some new-age thing, when people expect it all, and free, and so they just take take take, and the whole world owes them big?

It certainly seems to be a generation gap (you're not the first person I've had a conversation like this with), though I hope you'll appreciate I wouldn't put it quite as you have put it.

I certainly haven't done much in the go world, as I'm very new to it, and I shouldn't feel the need to justify my views by saying what I have given to the world, because I find doing that rather vulgar. But let it suffice to say that I believe I give as much as I take in life, even if (necessarily!) not always to the same people or in the same ways. Go is very much like that too: the strong teach the weak, expecting nothing in return except that they will pass the favour on. It is partly that attitude that attracted me to go. I certainly hope to grow up to be someone who can contribute to the go community in a substantial way. Meanwhile, though, I have no choice but to take other people's offerings or leave. And while I'm grateful for every game KGS has ever given me in the past (as I have made clear), it seems very strange to me to be asked to be grateful for the existence of KGS in the present, because I can't use it.

But I suspect we've said all we can to each other, and this is simply a difference of viewpoint. It's been interesting.

[Bantari]

Would *you* have any obligations? Or its all one-sided?

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

What I mean is this:

I created something for you. You use it. So we have a creator/user relationship going, for a lack of better word.

Now - you are saying that I have now obligations to you to either keep the thing I created running for you and running well. Or else I have to give it way to you or somebody else so they in turn can run it for you and run it well. Or else you don't think much of me or them. I don't agree with that, but I can accept that this is how you think.

Now my question is - do you think you also have some obligation as the user to the creator? Or is all the obligation one-sided, all resting on the creator, and the users are just that - 'users' (in the bad sense of the word)?

Was just trying to understand you better, that's all.

PS>
Everybody you ever talked to thinks everything should be free and open-source?
I mean... free things are nice, but really... what a world...

Reminds me of Star Trek universe where everybody works for free just for the sheer joy of helping others.
Unfortunately the translation to real world fails since we do not have robots to clean toilets and do stuff nobody else wants to do.

[Joaz Banbeck]

...
Joaz and I view the world from very different (perhaps diametrically opposed) philosophical perspectives. I think we understand each other fairly well and I more than welcome his thoughts and comments in opposition to mine...

Same here.

...And while hyperpape is correct on the misuse of "fallacy," I took Joaz's meaning within the context of his post and had some fun with it.

I'll grant Hyperpape that he is right: I am misusing the word 'fallacy' a bit. I am using it for what I believe to be an ontological error, whereas a true fallacy is a logical error.

...
Anyway, the deeper we get into such perspectives the more likely we'll trespass on the rule against political discussion. So perhaps we'll have to carry on our discussion in code, which is sort of what I was already doing and Joaz called me on it in rather terse fashion - not a problem for me.
...

The only reason we are tiptoeing on the edge of a political discussion is that the socialist fallacy is often misunderstood to be a political ideology. Whereas, if fact, it is primarily a social ideology. It only appears to be a political ideology because it has had its most significant effect in politics.

( By 'socialist fallacy', I mean the belief that a group of people has claims on the conduct of others that any single member of that group does not. In other words, it is the belief that person #2 might have no claim on person #1 as an individual, and also #3 might not have such a claim either, nor person #4, etc, BUT that the group of N persons does when N is large enough. )

In most instances when the socialist fallacy is invoked, the alleged miscreant can ignore it. ( If wms were to read this thread, he probably would ignore his alleged obligations and return to his coding. And that would be the end of it.) The socialist fallacy only becomes significant when some well-meaning politician fires up the power of the state and uses force to compel cooperation. Then, because it is a political event, we tend to erroneously consider it a political ideology instead of a social one.

=========================================================

Ultimately, Deja and I may end up advocating the same position. Neither of us likes the uncertainty of obligation.

... I think everyone would be better off if KGS were a paid client/server in its entirety. At least if you require payment for your work, there's a transactional basis on which your users/customers can expect and demand support...

I'd be happier with KGS if there were a clearly stated obligation. I'd be happy to pay wms for membership and in receive a statement of what I could expect in return. I make monthly payments for multiple buildings, cable service, utilities, space on Amazon and other servers, etc, and in each instance I receive a written statement of what I get in return. Why not run a go server that way?

I'll make a capitalist out of Deja yet.

[billywoods]

Now my question is - do you think you also have some obligation as the user to the creator?

To be clear, I don't think I've ever said very much about obligation, because that's far stronger a word than I would like to use - wms is free to retract his own creation if he wants to. It's just a really strange, and somewhat scummy, thing to do. Here is something closer to what I actually believe: once a creation is out in the public domain, if it's good, it deserves to stay there and be improved upon. That's not a statement about users or creators so much as it's a statement about communities and their creations or tools. (I am heavily influenced by having been brought up under the internet, of course.)

But, as a direct answer: no. Users have no "obligation" to creators in any sense, and creators don't have much "obligation" to users either. But this question is also not especially meaningful. In my ideal world, the community has an "obligation" to respect and maintain the tool, and the tool has an "obligation" to serve the community - to whatever extent that makes sense. I don't think this is a very foreign concept. (Think of an important public space, such as a church or a library in a small town - they're definitely not yours, but they are so important to the community that there is a very strong sense in which they should not be taken away.) In my ideal world, everyone is a user and a creator - to the best of their abilities. Every go player starts a student and ends a teacher, and spends most of their time somewhere in the middle. And so on.

I'm very aware of how this all sounds to you. But I really don't think it's pie-in-the-sky: I'd take Linux over Windows, or Wikipedia over Encyclopedia Britannica, any day. The internet has completely revolutionised the extent to which communities can interact with the tools that surround them. It's a mentality that runs right through small, self-sustaining villages, or universities, or most close-knit communities everywhere, and it's simply started applying on a global scale.

Everybody you ever talked to thinks everything should be free and open-source?

Everybody of roughly my age who I ever talked to about software, yes. That makes it a fairly small and biased sample, of course! The main caveat is that some of these people work in software companies and have no particular pangs of conscience about selling their creations (which is fine with me of course).

Anyway, this is all very interesting, but nothing to do with the discussion at hand, so I might stop here.