This kind of commoditization attitude of developers really fucks me off. "Shut up and code and don't complain". Nah, you can fuck right off mate.

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as an insensitive employer (I was an underpaid dev before so I know the frustration) but I really can't afford a full time US/UK/AUS developer who makes 2~3 times my current revenues.

I'm willing to pay top dollars if I could but right now I need to make my bootstrapped stuff stretch with every dollar. Once you take the helm of a business, it's painfully clear how expensive hiring people is.

I'm trying to build something like Patreon for open source developers where you get paid to work on open source projects the community requests.

I am actively trying to help people get paid, there's not much money that goes into my pocket, I'm doing this because I believe that 1) Open source is going to eat commercial software 2) Developers should be able to easily find side income or full time income without having to drive their wages to the floor on freelancer websites.

I've hired people from Ukraine, Romania before and they were every bit as good if not better in some aspects. The cost of living there is different and the USD goes a long way in many parts of the world.

I also think it's great to give people meaningful work all over the world, especially in places where they are rare due to structural economic issues.

Is there anything wrong with looking for developers that don't complain?

Total aside: As an Eastern European emigrant, I don't really mind being characterized as hard-working and rarely-complaining. I like to think it's true.

Depends what you're complaining about.

If you don't complain when you see something wrong, e.g. a bad design choice - then you're basically a yes man (or yes woman), and you're only useful to companies who are either already perfect, or who don't want your help to do better. The first does not exist and the second would be a crap place to work.

Right, yeah. I definitely complain when there's something egregiously wrong. But as much as I like to hear myself speak, I try not to overdo it.

Capitalism will eat you alive if you don't stand up for your wages and standard of living. I used to be a naive young graduate grateful for a job with the delusion that I would commit everything to my employer and get treated fairly in return. If your employer is cash rich, you should be reaping the rewards as well, not just quietly taking a pay cheque to enrich the shareholders at disproportionate rate.

This is further compounded by the fact that, as developers, we are terrible at recognising our worth and speaking up. Doesn't help that you are conditioned into an inferiority complex constantly reinforced by a ridiculous interview process.

Don't complain about the money and don't complain about my flawed illogical mock-up. But please, do take the blame in the end though, for my useless product.

The reason for this is exeedingly simple.

Marx theorised that instead of seeing the people behind transactions, rather we focus solely on the trade itself, the commodities involved. This is a simplification of the theory of commodity fetishism, so to say that commodities are fetishised by focusing on one particular aspect of the product rather than the whole web connecting the products, buyers, sellers, labourers etc.

And actually, developers are merely capital. Their labour time is purchased, just as the computer is purchased, or the loom or silk or bale of cotton. It's simply a transaction which is factored into all the other costs, there's nothing special about labour.

From Wage Labour and Capital:

>Consequently, it appears that the capitalist buys their labour with money, and that for money they sell him their labour. But this is merely an illusion. What they actually sell to the capitalist for money is their labour-power. This labour-power the capitalist buys for a day, a week, a month, etc. And after he has bought it, he uses it up by letting the worker labour during the stipulated time. With the same amount of money with which the capitalist has bought their labour-power (for example, with two shillings) he could have bought a certain amount of sugar or of any other commodity. The two shillings with which he bought 20 pounds of sugar is the price of the 20 pounds of sugar. The two shillings with which he bought 12 hours' use of labour-power, is the price of 12 hours' labour. Labour-power, then, is a commodity, no more, no less so than is the sugar. The first is measured by the clock, the other by the scales.