Had a look at the table of contents and while I want you to take your time to make sure that the book is everything you want it to be, I would Iie if I said anything but that I can’t wait to get my hands on it!!!
Didn’t see the notification letting me know you had replied to my comment… So my apologies for the insanely delayed reply, but yes, I’m very much in favour of early access! First of all, I get my hands on something I’m interested in sooner than I otherwise would have, and second of all, I get to support the creator of that work as he or she is creating it, so if you do decide to go down the early access route, please ping me (I will make sure to keep better track of the notifications!!!) and I would happily buy the early access version of the book.
Oh, I’m so torn on this issue. In principle I love the idea that everything should be open access and free, but the fact of the matter is that all of us need to make a living, and without knowing the specifics of this particular situation, I think that the creator of a work ought to be able to charge for it if he or she spends so much time working on it that they have no other income sources from which to sustain themselves, provided that there is demand for the product or service in the first place, of course. Ideally a foundation would provide Looeee with funding to write this book so that he could make it open access, or maybe you could go for one of those funding models where people pay what they think think they can spare balanced against what they think the product or service is worth, so that people with lesser means can enjoy the fruits of projects like these, while the creators would also be able to sustain themselves working on them. Not sure that works in all cases, though.
Fact of the matter is that open source projects often confer hidden benefits in that they put you on the map and bring career opportunities. I don’t get a dime from working on my h00ting space and gravity simulator, but last time I looked for work I got three offers two weeks after sending my first application, and while that is by no means my motivation for working on this project, I do realise that indirectly it is a very lucrative affair, and I suspect this is the case for a lot of people working on open source projects, and I don’t think there is anything wrong with that or that one should have to pretend that open source does not confer financial benefits.
Sorry for the brain fart, but I just felt like I had to chime in
Oh, I’m so torn on this issue. In principle I love the idea that everything should be open access and free, but the fact of the matter is that all of us need to make a living, and without knowing the specifics of this particular situation.
I’m not really torn i just find it fascinating
Open source can get REALLY confusing when it comes to this kind of stuff. I kinda like free markets, we all decide what we get to do with our time, what we’re going to eat and where we’re going to live etc. Everyone who contributed to three.js is a volunteer and is aware of the fact that they’re giving up their labor for free from the get go.
This all depends on the circumstances. Some people involved in the project live here in the Bay Area which means that their contribution is heavily subsidized by some tech giant, or millions in VC cash. It’s just how it works, it’s one of the most expensive places in the world, the most expensive in the US to live in, so your employer simply covers that. Your free time is basically on their dime.
On the other hand there was a thread here describing the universal income in Finland which makes it seem so that a government is subsidizing three.js
Regarding a book, i think it’s extremely taxing to keep one up to date for a project such as three.js. Back in the day there have even been print versions available, but i think they were quickly dated.
It would be really great if a book like this were to be live - constantly updated. The tremendous amount of effort would simply have to be covered by someone or something. It could be one individual with an inheritance or a lottery winner. It could be a highly paid individual with a lot of free time. It could be an individual that lives off of donations, or sales. This could have a monthly access for example.
But it could also be a consortium of people, volunteers, that keep this live. Which brings us back to the starting point, since it looks exactly like the development of three.js itself. If this book were available as a project on github, or even as part of the main three.js repo, everyone could contribute at the same time they’re making a feature. PR’s could even be blocked if the “book is broken”.
I’m not sure if i understand. You could be the most productive worker in soviet Russia, but you might not have access to all the tools, a garage, etc. to conduct experiments of your own. I think there’s much more to it than just being productive.