# Funding, getting paid, and designing for FLOSS

**URL:** <https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/funding-getting-paid-and-designing-for-floss/116>\
**Category:** Design Lounge\
**Created:** [April 27, 2017, 6:06pm UTC](https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/funding-getting-paid-and-designing-for-floss/116 "2017-04-27T18:06:30Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![simonv3](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.opensourcedesign.net/simonv3/32/15_2.png) [@simonv3](https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/u/simonv3)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2017, 3:16pm UTC](https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/funding-getting-paid-and-designing-for-floss/116/4 "2017-04-28T15:16:55Z")

</div>

Thanks for the thoughts both!

> [@grahamperrin](#):
>
> Exploitation can be multiway (not a siphon), and mutually beneficial.

The article is talking specifically about [exploitation of labour](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploitation_of_labour), rather than the general word “exploitation”. This isn’t an “underground” context, but rather a philosophical and economic mode of thought that is very relevant to our time and day, and very important to a conversation about who does work for free and on what. Especially when corporations do end up benefitting from (exploiting) that free labor (through freely available tools that are better because they were developed in the open). A marxist analysis of open source contributions probably already exists elsewhere, and isn’t really the point of this discussion, but just thought I’d elaborate on that exploitation bit.

^ but that kind of mumbo jumbo can easily turn people off. So you need to be able to have that conversation, but then provide a trimmed down version for newcomers to our site.

> [@jdittrich](#):
>
> Another factor we should not forget is that designer may often be seen as similar to artists (and I met many designers who liked that), so some of paying-for-art culture may have came in from there to (like: “It is self expression”, “Only for high-brow-culture”, “No value as a tool”…)

Exactly! Apple has pushed design, and SV has embraced it, but often it’s still a hard to convince open source developers that design is a necessary part of software development. Part of that legitimatization then pushes back against the idea of free work.

> [@jdittrich](#):
>
> One could compare that work to other, well recognized voluntary work. One could clean ones neighborhood or give tutoring lessons but one could also improve the “digital neighborhood” or create digital tutoring lessons.  
> At least in Europe, societies or clubs which do voluntary work are known, too. It may sound stale, but that is something that many people can relate to.

“Want to help build freedom for our digital future?”

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/funding-getting-paid-and-designing-for-floss/116)._