Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> So what all these guys need is a separate FOSS organisation exclusively dedicated to fund-raising.

I'm afraid that such an organisation will gradually be taken over by people looking to make money more than to help open-source software, and in the end we'll end up worse off than not having anything, because most donations to that organisation will get used for "internal expenses".



I think this attitude is holding FOSS back. The most successful projects are the ones that are funded: Linux, Blender, and Ubuntu to name 3. On the other hand we have projects like Gimp, which steadily makes excellent progress and gets better with every release, but the rate of change is glacial because the team are all working on it in their spare time.

That's not to say that the motivation of profit can't also be corrupting. Gnome 3.0 and the associated libs was a complete disaster IMO, and a lot of the stupidity came IMO from a fear that Windows Vista would leave the Linux desktop behind, but the net gain of monetary investment is clear to me.

The silly thing is, I'd much rather pay for software that is free than software that is proprietary. I won't use Adobe Suite on principle, especially now that it is subscription only, but I'd pay a subscription to Gimp in a heartbeat. I may not be in the majority, but I'm sure there are enough of us that we would generate enough income to make the difference.


It's fine when it's one project seeking funding for itself. When it's some umbrella org gathering funding for some nebulous "F/OSS community" that I start getting wary. I think it would be better if each large project could build within itself a framework for seeking funding, rather than one group seeking joint funding for everyone. That concentrates too much political power in one place leading to a higher chance of a takeover by unwanted people.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: