What Actually Happened to Faker.js: Open Source Contribution Lessons
Tags: opensource, faker, javascript, story
Published: 2023-03-23 14:32:29

Open source libraries are frequently used by developers to facilitate their work. Faker.js is a well-known tool for creating random fake data that is used in demonstrations and applications. But a recent problem with the library raised some concerns about the ethics of utilizing open source contributions and their sustainability.

**The Issue with faker.js**

The most recent version of faker.js was attempted to be used by an experienced developer, however an unexpected error message was received. They looked into it and found that the source code was gone from the GitHub repository, with just one commit that said "end game" left. The only statement in the README file was "What really Happened to Aaron Swartz."

![README ](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/g2uob3q139q9l2st9bfn.png)


**The Tragic Story of Aaron Swartz**

If you're not aware with Aaron Swartz, he was a web development pioneer who made substantial contributions to the development of Reddit, the Markdown format, RSS, and Creative Commons. Unfortunately, his legacy was short-lived when, in 2013, he committed suicide after being accused of federal offenses connected to his work to increase public access to academic research.

![Aaron Swartz](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/p1jiscjoishhmefpz3bw.png)


Swartz downloaded several academic papers from JSTOR, a digital repository that demanded access fees, because he thought information should be freely available. In the end, his untimely death was caused by the accusations against him and the accompanying court dispute.

![JSTOR](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/9kus8k2ywz3cqiki09pp.png)


**Open Source Contributions and Compensation**

Back to the faker.js problem and the "end game" commit, it was found that the library's maintainer had made a critical choice. According to them, they no longer wanted to support Fortune 500 businesses that did not provide fair compensation. This choice triggered a discussion regarding the morality of utilizing contributions to open source software and the requirement to pay developers.

![Fortune ](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/4y9376qb3n76t7rtl5t5.png)


While open source contributions are crucial to the software's progress, it is important to remember that engineers need fair pay for their labor. Many open source contributors receive far less compensation than what their efforts are worth. The fact is that open source requires a solid business model or enough compensation for the developers in order to be financially sustainable.

Regrettably, a lot of businesses, consulting firms, and startups profit greatly from open source software without paying the creators anything. Even worse, some businesses exploit and steal code without adhering to the proper open-source licensing guidelines.

**A New Era of Open Source?**

The fact is that for open source to be feasible, a sound business plan or a comfortable salary is necessary to make it worthwhile. However, even that may not be sufficient, as evidenced by the adoption of more restrictive open source licenses by big companies like mongodb and elasticsearch, which prevent commercial services like Amazon Web Services from using their software. Perhaps independent open source developers should follow suit. It's unclear whether Bitcoin offers a solution, but I welcome your thoughts in the comments. Nevertheless, if you're working on a library for years with a high number of downloads, like Vue.js, and barely making any money, you may end up making the tough decision to stop contributing altogether.