Author: pavel
Date: 10:12:36 09/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2000 at 12:30:51, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 05, 2000 at 12:04:50, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>One day someone may write a book about the sociology of computer chess. Well, >>maybe the topic is not interesting enough for a book, but at least an article >>could be fascinating. A few paragraphs should relate to beta-testing and the >>relationship between CC freaks and programmers. Fernando: are you interested? >> >>Months ago, Uri posted that he expected to be paid for his collaboration with >>the development of chess programs. It made me smile, because beta-testing is >>supposed to be a privilege for the tester, although I never quite understood why >>it works this way. But it does. From one day to the next, a freak may be >>promoted to the "in" circle, improve his status to the imaginary rank of expert >>and get the ensuing ego-booster, but he has to pay a price. I have seen private >>emails from beta-testers published without permission when it was commercially >>convenient; beta-testers demoted as no-team members; beta-testers forced to >>write commercially useful stuff for the honor of spending X (when X tends to >>very many) hours hunting for bugs and checking the engine. Etc. It would seem a >>matter of common sense to assume, as Uri did, that collaborating in the >>improvement of a commercial product is a paid job, but in computer chess it is >>the other way round, even if the tester doesn't pay with money but in species. > >I want to say that I know that programmers do not earn much from their program >so I do not think that beta testers should earn a lot of money from their job >but I think that it is fair to get something from it(even if it is only 0.1$ per >hour of testing). > >A programmer can decide to give all the beta testers together 20% of the money >that the programmer earns from his(her) program in the next year >(the programmer can decide to give part of them more money if they are more >important and give more productive information). > >It may be a good deal for the programmer because the programmer can get better >beta testers or even the same beta testers who work only for his(her) program >and not for other programs and if these better beta testers are the difference >between being number 1 in the ssdf and being number 2 both sides can earn money >from this deal. > >Uri and how would you know how much hours the beta tester is actually spending on the testing? how would you calculate it with minimum wage? I personally believe it is a previlege for the beta tester, just like enrique said. the best the company (or programer) can do is to mention the beta-testers name in the "credits" . just a thought pavel :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.