They don’t, so this stays in my shower
To devil’s advocate in a different direction, most projects aren’t setup to actually do anything with donations. They could be, like if they had a stable income source they could hire people full time as a job rather then relying on volunteer time. And some of the larger projects are already at that point, and so maybe having more money would allow them to expand the team further. And some projects have a particular goal they’re trying to fund, like an external security audit, or some kind of certification process.
But for most projects, sporadic donations are like “hey cool, I guess. I’ll go out to dinner tonight” gifts of appreciation, because up until they become a solid full time wage, they’re not a solid full time wage. And once they are a solid full time wage, any further donations are like “hey cool, I’ll go out to dinner tonight” until they’re big enough to be a second wage 😛
I’m not saying we shouldn’t donate stuff, gifts of appreciation are still appreciated, I’m sure. But they don’t produce output.
But they don’t produce output
I would argue that this is not even close to true.
As an open source developer myself, my contribution to open source is pretty much exactly proportional to how well I’m feeling. Getting a donation makes me feel appreciated, using the money makes me feel better, all leading to me being more motivated to spend time on some open-source.
Obviously, being able to only work on open-source would generate more output, but the psychological impact of feeling appreciated to output can’t be dismissed and is huge.
Huh, that’s some fun psychology. Donations make me feel guilty and uncomfortable 😛
Good to know someone enjoys them!
Well, this is in the context of people choosing to accept donations as an open-source developer. Taking donations requires opt-in, I would assume someone like you just wouldn’t take them in the first place.
However, I’m sorry that they make you uncomfortable or even guilty, because that sounds to me like you think you don’t deserve them. Which to me, is sad, because the other person making the donation definitely thinks you deserved it.
Smaller projects don’t have structure for managing donations in part because they’re not used to receiving donations. There’s a chicken and egg problem in here
The Pope literally just gave a speech about AI, saying it needs to serve humanity first and foremost — so the Pope would agree with you (if he understood FOSS; he might, but I’m not sure). While it’s not always the best position to be in agreement with the Pope, apparently he also quoted or paraphrased Gandalf, so apparently it was a pretty good speech.
A pope is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to.
The Catholic Church considered being gay a sin until a few years ago. It has protected pedos throughout its history and continues to do so.
Wtf do I care if he quoted Gandalf. The fact that he’s going on a crusade against AI should make everyone reconsider their own stance. The church is not a beacon of truth.
It’s always nice to see those relay such a perspective. They have ~1 billion followers - let’s welcome when their interests and discourses align with ours.
They certainly have a broader reach than this lill sub…
How many followers does Putin and Netanyahu have? Would you be patting them on the back if they said the same. If it came out that historically, Hitler had been against AI and quoted Gandalf that one time, would you be giving the thumbs up?
Whenever the subject of AI comes up, people’s brains turn to mush.
The church is a vile organization and are white washing themselves with this. Gross.
Lots of what’s ifs in there. Benefiting from their word is not the same as condoning them.
Additionally this is not about being against AI, it’s about putting humanity first… which would be a rather interesting position to see Hilter adopt isn’t it?
No quid pro quo needed either btw - the pope’s position is a self sufficient topic, there’s no need to bring the whole gang in this.
Do you think the church puts humanity first when they convince people to hate on gays and fuck without condoms in aids ridden africa? Is it in the benefit of humanity to protect pedos?
The Pope’s position is self sufficient, I need to bring the whole gang in so you can realize that his position is a lot more than just being against AI.
It’s a pat on the back just because he said one thing you agree with, and ignores the mountain of vile shit that isn’t even hidden. Definition of white washing.
Man, it is ONE isolated statement we benefit for, not condoning the establishment - why the hell are you obsessed with dragging the discussion there?
We don’t platform vile organization just because they say one good thing.
Did you ask yourself how you would react if Hitler said it and a puff piece found itself in your feed? The analogy is there for a reason. Yes, it’s an exaggeration but it’s meant to bring things to light so to speak.
It isn’t one isolated statement, you can’t isolate the statement from the church.
Like bro, you think he used a quote from Gandalf because he likes lord of the rings? It’s a media campaign. The church is trying to bring up their numbers and they are coasting off AI because it’s easier to change their actual policies. The new pope goes viral every month because that’s easier than to actually stop his goons from raping kids and convince the parish that the gays aren’t actually evil.
Gandalf is tho
I think that’s my main issue with it. It’s blasphemy hearing him quote Gandalf. He can keep his dirty hands away from my Bible, he has his own.
That would be very valid but lotr is basically catholic hard SciFi
Is there like a meta-subscription somewhere to do that? I honestly don’t have time to look into this structurally but if there was a simple « humble bundle » style app I would use it over when I stumble on a button somewhere on GitHub.
It would be nice to have it curated - I personally don’t track FOSS projects that support my life.
If you’re an EU citizen, just paying taxes does a lot.
Ho TIL… that’s a nice one. I still stand by my « let’s have a way to participate more » but this is definitely nice to know that my taxes are at least supporting some.
Interesting one. Not a “bouquet” but clearly a dedicated one I align with.
The FSF are the creators of the GPL license and the GNU project and arguably invented open source as a concept. The GNU project is essentially what makes up what we know as Linux (except for the kernel itself) as well as tons of other software including every GNOME application, GIMP, Emacs*, Bash, and plenty of others I can’t think of. They also offer assistance to developers when the GPL is violated.
I’d argue they are a little bit of a bouquet.
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here.
Paying a contribution will not give me the feature I want or need from a project, most project explicitly say so. Paying for a LLM to create a PR or a fork that will contain that feature is often a lot easier and a pretty good guarantee I will get it.
I am not diving into the code quality or maintainability of such PR/forks which is a whole thing in itself.
I am not diving into the code quality or maintainability of such PR/forks which is a whole thing in itself.
Is it a whole separate thing though? Maintainability of open source projects seems like the main concern for OP. Creating a fork that is impossible to maintain or merge is rot. The only people that benefit from it are you, temporarily, but mostly just Anthropic.
I mainly just make my own projects or fork and add to existing stuff, I figure as long as it’s MIT FOSS meh it kinda equals out.
I also only spend about 30 a month for two services and run a local one.
They are not because the point isn’t to contribute to the software, the point is to make their GitHub page look better to get more work
deleted by creator
Ive thought the same thing.
