Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Software Social Networks The Internet Programming IT Technology

Crowdsourcing Software Development to the Masses 122

Lucas123 writes "Computer World is running a piece on Crowdsourcing. That's a catchy term for the practice of taking a job traditionally performed by employees or a contracted company and outsourcing it to an undefined, large group of people in the form of an open call on the Web. Article author Mary Brandel views it as a viable way to develop cheap but innovative software. Sites like TopCoder and their coding competitions are becoming more popular with big name companies like Constellation Energy because programmers who take on the job are global, offering many different perspectives on any one job. 'The creativity and innovation of how people are rationalizing these designs and building components enables us to interject a perspective and approach that normally we wouldn't have access to,' Constellation's director of IT said." Is there any potential here, or is this just a buzzword bad idea?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Crowdsourcing Software Development to the Masses

Comments Filter:
  • by $RANDOMLUSER ( 804576 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @05:50PM (#21604027)
    Yeah. Galaxy Zoo, Wikipedia and the like, I get, but what, exactly, is my incentive to write code (for free) for a company to make money from?
  • by hobo sapiens ( 893427 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @05:55PM (#21604143) Journal
    Whatever kind of software we are talking about, you'll most likely get a horrid UI and the resulting usability headaches.

    On one hand, you get design by committee. A UI that is not great, but just didn't offend anyone, the software equivalent of a meal at Olive Garden. Many MSFT apps have a designed by committee feel.

    On the other hand you get no real UI conventions so various parts of the application look like what they are: a patchwork. Some F/OSS software has this type of design shortfall.

    Sounds like a less focused version of an open source project. F/OSS embraces a certain ideal. I don't know if providing a free service for a for-profit corporation falls under that idea.
  • by us7892 ( 655683 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:02PM (#21604259) Homepage
    So, the company describing this task had their architects divide the "project" into a hundred or so pieces to be worked on separately. Then, the best designs, submitted confidentially, get picked and used the company, with some "royalties" getting paid out. The company developers combine the best of these components into the finished product...

    Something just doesn't seem right here... MobSourcing, RiotCoding, I mean CrowdSourcing. Seems like a good way to get all sorts of stolen code, easter eggs, and pretty much crappy code into your codebase.
  • by justsomecomputerguy ( 545196 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:03PM (#21604271) Homepage
    Jeesh - Doesn't anyone read the classics anymore? It's only been available for over 130 years...
  • by BrianRoach ( 614397 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:09PM (#21604357)

    There's a slight difference between giving a mega-corp some code for free so they can make more money vs. working on an open-source project which you enjoy and that benefits many folks ...

    (You can argue that SOME opensource projects lead to companies making money via support services ... but they're far and few between ... and really, if that's the case, you can make money from it as well should you choose.)

    - Roach
  • Maintenance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tknd ( 979052 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:14PM (#21604437)

    Building new things is great and all but any sane software engineer will understand that maintaining the software is a much harder and more complex problem than building the first version. Even if you pick the best built components, at some point later your customers are going to want a new feature or want a broken feature fixed. I don't think you can simply hold a competition to figure out who can submit the best maintenance job. Additionally, once the competitors submit their entries, they have no further obligation to work for you. So you've essentially lost the most important assets (the people that wrote the stuff) on the day you receive the finished the work. You could always have your own people maintain it but they will be much more costly than had you kept the original authors who do not need to re-learn the code.

  • by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:23PM (#21604553)

    That's a catchy term for the practice of taking a job traditionally performed by employees or a contracted company and outsourcing it to an undefined, large group of people in the form of an open call on the Web

    You mean like a few days ago when a story submitter commanded us "slashdotters" to go rifling through Microsoft's OOXML documents for them so, that IBM and friends wouldn't have to pay staffers/paralegals/lawyers to do so?

  • Sounds great... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:33PM (#21604729) Homepage
    ....until you get one crap piece of code that goes into an infinite loop on bad input or just some odd input and kills the whole shit. Unless you've written a good set of unit cases, and if you did you'd probably easily write the code yourself with that level of understanding. Reviewing code is IMO a very time-consuming and difficult skill, and putting good people to review bad code to look for the best is usually a waste of time. Either they will skip the checking, or they're skilled enough to write it themselves and on better time. Though I suppose it's better than putting bad people at reviewing, which is the deaf leading the blind. Honestly, would you like a product that's put together by a hundred different indian code shops, only somewhat worse?

    What every software company wants is predictability - they want to know if you typically turn out good code or poor code, then they can review accordingly. And by that I don't mean nothing, everyone has a bad day and everyone makes mistakes, but if it's the new intern you know it needs much more review. There's no way they could be just as thorough on all parts and still deliver this century. Crowdsourcing sounds to me like a lemon market [wikipedia.org], where you'd want reliable contributors rather than the fly-by-night lemon sellers. That's exactly the opposite, where you go into long-term relationships and both side want long-time commitments rather than this micromanagement.
  • by DragonWriter ( 970822 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @06:35PM (#21604771)

    Basically, with enough random contributions, the counterproductive/arbitrary elements tend to cancel and the coherent parts add up over time. Ironically, this is probably why democracy tends to be a reasonably stable form of government.


    Not really. Democracy is fairly stable because the main reason for government instability is that, in non-participatory systems, people often have no effective way to protest unwelcome government action except for seeking overthrow of the government (making those systems unstable, since discontent builds up and then explodes), whereas in participatory systems, direct participation provides an outlet.

    This is also related to why, among democracies, systems which feature a wider array of viable parties tend to have much higher satisfaction than those, like the US, with very few, since the array of meaningful electoral choices is closely related to how much of the population feels their ideas are effectively represented in government.
  • It's just business (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hyades1 ( 1149581 ) <hyades1@hotmail.com> on Thursday December 06, 2007 @07:06PM (#21605209)

    Why pay for something when you can get it for free (even if you're only paying pennies on the dollar by outsourcing)? Comedy clubs have used this model for years with "Open Mike" nights, and media outlets have their unpaid "interns".

    There is an endless supply of desperate, talented people who will do anything for free in the hope that their gifts will get them noticed by an employer. Employers, of course, are quick to exploit this reservoir of free talent without mercy or restraint.

  • by KC7GR ( 473279 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @07:16PM (#21605345) Homepage Journal
    Seems to me that doing this sort of thing could, assuming minimal checking of the results, open one's code up to widespread abuse in the form of 'back doors' or 'logic bombs' that anyone not pleased with the idea (say, programmers unhappy with the entire outsourcing/offshoring pattern) could manage to slip in.

    As others have (accurately) pointed out, this is also little more than a way to be lazy about doing a job, and not caring if it's done right as long as your company gets paid for it. What benefit do those actually writing your code get for their efforts?

    There are right ways and wrong ways to go about doing any task. This strikes me as just plain wrong. I certainly wouldn't want to do any project I come up with this way. It would be like Boeing throwing open their design process to the world, and saying "OK, you design our next plane for us, but we get to use any idea you come up with and not pay you." Ludicrous, hmmm?

  • by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @08:10PM (#21606047) Journal
    because programmers who take on the job are global, offering many different perspectives on any one job.

    This is PHB speak for "cheap foreign labor". I recognize phrases similar to this from pro-H1B (visa-worker) business lobbyist websites. "Many different perspectives" is just fluffy "global community" talk to hide the real i$$ue.
         
  • by f1055man ( 951955 ) on Thursday December 06, 2007 @09:24PM (#21606833)
    See it everywhere.
    Overstock.com Divulges Secret To Its Cyber Monday Success [informationweek.com]
    Their secret? They hired engineers. I shit you not, they were a .com with all the tech outsourced. Apparently if you kiss enough asses and make enough powerpoints you start to believe that that's what makes shit happen. The leaches go from one very important golf game to the next while the engineers are busy making shit and rolling their eyes at the douchebaggery. Engineers make the world go round. The eyerolling I mean, something about angular velocity or some shit. Kind of slept through physics class. I was a business major at the time, didn't think it was very practical.

"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight

Working...