On Monday, November 3, 2014 4:56:29 PM UTC-8, Matthew Brett wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Richard Fateman <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > > > On Monday, November 3, 2014 1:26:18 AM UTC-8, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > >> > >> Am 03.11.2014 um 03:56 schrieb Richard Fateman: > >> > There is a difference in the size of the user base and there is a > >> > difference > >> > in the sophistication of the code. The Cathedral and the Bazaar > essay > >> > doesn't work if bugs do not become shallow with enough eyes. > >> > You can dig a ditch with many shovellers. It is implausible to do a > >> > heart transplant that way. > >> > >> You can get around that with automatic validation. The better the > >> validation the better the results. > > > > > > I don't know what you mean by automatic validation. > > > >> > >> Also, I doubt that closed source is much better at this. Whether it's > >> open or closed source, you need some really bright people on the team, > >> and either way, it's not easy to attract or keep them. Closed source > can > >> offer bundles of money, open source can choose among the whole world, > so > >> it's not even clear which approach will give you more bright people. > > > > > > Really? You think that it is unclear? Here's the choice for a > > programmer > > 1. You can take a job for a high salary. Use it to support yourself and > your > > family. > > 2. You can take a job for no money. Your work will be given away. > > If you need money, you can deliver pizza or whatever. > > Or - put another way, for the scientist programmer: > > 1. You can take a job for a high salary where you can't give away any > of your work (the source is closed), and you contribute much less or > not at all to community projects > 2. You can take a job for a fairly low or moderate salary where you > can give away your work, contribute to community projects, and you > also get to study interesting scientific problems. > > I can't personally think of option 1 as anything but a last resort, > but I know there is some difference of opinion on that. >
Mathematics graduate student stipends are generally rather low. You can study interesting scientific problems even if you are highly paid. See Google. Even see publications from WRI, sometimes. Outside the academic community, pay will be rather low; granted that if you are supporting (say) Linux, you might do ok. If you are supporting the Risch Algorithm, not so much. RJF > > Cheers, > > Matthew > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/79941bde-297b-4ab4-ba24-76de36453caa%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
