Gregory's Server@josh Alternatively, start paying open source projects or foundations like consumer facing businesses.
|
19 comments
@jens @josh given the regulatory stuff like supply chain that will hit projects, that may well need to happen. Depends on the project and what it's used for. People do have a powerful need to eat and ensure their chosen folk eat as well. We need to talk more about project sustainability. Because it's really hard to focus on your project if your income isn't enough.  Indeed. Alas, as long as free-riding governments and NGOs are given a pass to continue to abuse free software projects to get free labor, there will be little incentive for strong policy to promote project sustainability. @downey @jens @josh while there are many projects getting some funding from various bodies, it's usually to get them to investment or a market. If we truly want sustainable, open infrastructure and online community spaces, those projects need some form of sponsorship or patronage. Less Tech Unicorns or Zebras, more draught horses.  I mean, it's hardly comparable, but back when I came online for the first time, I played a browser game. (My nickname is from that time). The game was developed by someone as hobby. In order to compensate for the infrastructure he asked for donations. Within the game was an always visible bar, that „the server would continue to run for N more days“ unless money comes in. If the bill was covered, there was a Thank You note instead. It was effective.  @onepict seems to me, if we want sustainable #Libre software, we need governments to realise that it is digital public infrastructure & fund it they way they do physical public infrastructure (well, like they do in most countries). Government's job (in addition to regulating society & private industry) is to invest in the greater good. @downey @jens @josh I agree this would be a great benefit; however, in practice what is happening is governments instead funding those who deploy the ("free as in exploitation") software. Solution is not effective until the resources pass through the entire supply chain. @downey a strong case could, I think, be made that publicly funding proprietary software (i.e. implicit monopolies) is contrary to the greater good, and public funds should not be allocated to it. At all. We just need leaders who understand the exploitative nature of Big Tech (see https://davelane.nz/proprietary), are smart enough to realise that TrickleDown Economics isn't a thing, *and* who aren't corrupt af. Sadly, seems unlikely those stars'll align any time soon. @onepict @jens @josh  @lightweight One difficulty with that is that public funding of industry is already common practice, so excluding tech from that is going to need more than a strong case. @downey @onepict @josh @lightweight @lightweight Sure, but then you're facing an even bigger fight. I think it's probably best to find a way to make FLOSS fundable, but not its exploitation - that's business as usual. @jens ultimately, this comes down to fundamental principles of democracy, which are being flouted in most of the world's so-called democracies. It seems to me that the "greater good" and "core digital infrastructure" are the "right" direction to head, but yes, it won't be easy. I think anything that depends on businesses or philanthropy is doomed before it begins. @downey @onepict @josh @jens @geichel @onepict @downey @josh @geichel @downey @jens @josh @WikimediaIE I think lots of us in this space would be happy to talk. But the question becomes how can we help one another? @onepict @downey @jens @josh @WikimediaIE The ways we can help each other are to: |
@jens @josh that is, if they accept it :)