The free for ‘personal or public’ and paid for ‘commercial or private’ is a matter of inclusivity and reciprocity: the majority of the world has an internet connection yet earns less than american minimum wage, it is unfair and needless that the artificial scarcity of information billing should have their minds starve or for maintainers to go unpaid because of non-reciprocal extend and extinguish strategies, these spoil opportunity. Talk - Eben Moglen - Free and Open Software: Paradigm for a New Intellectual Commons - YouTube
For the other complexities:
- The CoinGecko pack is dead in the water due to rate limits that can only be overcome with tiered billing for its commercial api; it’s probably not the first or last in this situation
- I’d like to offer various perks to subscribers who pay more - incorporating external services - such as support retainers and shoutouts in featured documents, readmes, changelogs, newsletters
@Vinny_Green suggested tiered usage billing for some of my upcoming packs that have enterprise use cases - which usage tracking occurs within the external services that provide the primary pack functionality
- An external billing system also enables referral kickbacks which nurtures partnerships between pack developers and pack ambassadors/salesman/evangelists/marketers
All in all, I’ll have a unified (consistent and shared) billing across all my offerings (coda and otherwise), including the hundreds of npm packages of mine that will go dual-license, and some web services I’m working on. It’s just a matter of license enforcement, and improving the abilities to enforce and reciprocate; something the winds are changing on.
Considering the extent of what I wish to accomplish, I’ll probably go with the proxy technique (which also solves the coingecko rate limit issue by itself as I can control per user and shared caching). However, having those API calls certainly offers a better getting started experience.
An initial coda inhouse workaround could be for pack makers to issue coupons that apply a discount. I could set all my packs at the premium price, then have a “email me for a coupon if you genuinely can’t afford it” proposition.
If the contention is about lock-in on pack billing, there is already lock-in on pack functionality, and pack functionality (for the maker and for coda) is the superior value-add. Creators will increasingly stand out by becoming networked tribes on multiple platforms, an area the music industry already succeeds and leads. This is similar to proprietary networking, however on a global stage reciprocity starts with sharing, then to perks of scarcity. I envision each creator tribe having their own billing pack, which generates licenses for their other packs, enabling streamlined in-coda billing for everything the creator can imagine or require. Per-pack builtin billing exposes packs to increased risk of a race to the bottom undercutting; it’s easy to undercut hundreds of individual packs; it’s hard to undercut a tribe, that’s a war, and wars are costly so networking is often easier.
Personally and ultimately, I kind of see Coda and all software and information, as paper. Paper lets me create new qualities. Digital paper scales. Coda is triumphant digital paper. It is our time that ultimately constrains our creative potential, as other resources can be acquired through time. If paper asks me for money, then that is strange. Money manages the scarcity of resources but ultimately is trading time. Directing money away from the arbitrariness of a ‘good already made’ to the ‘scarce resource directly’ achieves future support of the creator in what seems a purer way; of course still inclusive of credit to other scarcity costs; we are physical and virtual beings. The music industry is well on its way in this transition. The trick is always what leverage is enough to complete the animation; the catalysts that change the norm.