4 ms·

That's a lie, lots of people donate voluntarily for their favorite free software every day. If you decide to be a leech that's fine too, but don't try to convin

That's a lie, lots of people donate voluntarily for their favorite free software every day. If you decide to be a leech that's fine too, but don't try to convince yourself others are that way as well.

pjmlp 7y ago
Donations don't allow for a sustainable business.
- BurningCycles 7y ago
  Blender, Krita are notable FOSS projects being sustainable through donations. I'm not saying it's easy, just that it's not impossible.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Blender was a commercial product and has some big studios doing those donations, as far as I remember. And I bet only a lucky few of the contributors get to see the money.
    - BurningCycles 7y ago
      >Blender was a commercial product 18 years ago, since then it's been open source and paid for by donations >and has some big studios doing those donations These big studios started donating this past year when the development fund was started (and really took off during the latter part of this year for some reason), before that it was donations and in later years also the Blender Cloud service. >And I bet only a lucky few of the contributors get to see the money. Well, most (if not all) of the Blender developers now working full time where Blender contributors, also Blender is a non-profit organization.
- laughinghan 7y ago
  But they demonstrably can allow for a sustainable project, the obvious example being the Linux Foundation. And if you admit to the existence of donations, then do you admit that you were wrong to say "open source folks don't want to pay for anything"?
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Since you brought up the Linux Foundation as an example, the large pool of contributions are from Fortune 500 happy to use Linux instead of paying for UNIX licenses. Which in any case only a tiny part of kernel contributors can live from.
    - 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
      Most of the kernel is written by big companies?
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        Indeed, without them Linux would be another Minix clone.
    - laughinghan 7y ago
      Tiny part? Your immediate preceding sentence observes that the large pool of kernel contributors live on salaries provided to them by Fortune 500 companies. Is that a roundabout way of admitting that you're wrong and open source can be sustainable?
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        Not even close, because those developers are employees from Fortune 500 companies in one way or the other, they are not being paid by other developers paying to use Linux based software as such.
        laughinghan 7y ago
        I don't understand. "Not even close to sustainable", you say, then complete the sentence by describing the situation in which Linux has been and continues to be sustainable.
        pjmlp 7y ago

pjmlp 7y ago

Donations don't allow for a sustainable business.

BurningCycles 7y ago
Blender, Krita are notable FOSS projects being sustainable through donations. I'm not saying it's easy, just that it's not impossible.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Blender was a commercial product and has some big studios doing those donations, as far as I remember. And I bet only a lucky few of the contributors get to see the money.
  - BurningCycles 7y ago
    >Blender was a commercial product 18 years ago, since then it's been open source and paid for by donations >and has some big studios doing those donations These big studios started donating this past year when the development fund was started (and really took off during the latter part of this year for some reason), before that it was donations and in later years also the Blender Cloud service. >And I bet only a lucky few of the contributors get to see the money. Well, most (if not all) of the Blender developers now working full time where Blender contributors, also Blender is a non-profit organization.
laughinghan 7y ago
But they demonstrably can allow for a sustainable project, the obvious example being the Linux Foundation. And if you admit to the existence of donations, then do you admit that you were wrong to say "open source folks don't want to pay for anything"?
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Since you brought up the Linux Foundation as an example, the large pool of contributions are from Fortune 500 happy to use Linux instead of paying for UNIX licenses. Which in any case only a tiny part of kernel contributors can live from.
  - 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
    Most of the kernel is written by big companies?
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Indeed, without them Linux would be another Minix clone.
  - laughinghan 7y ago
    Tiny part? Your immediate preceding sentence observes that the large pool of kernel contributors live on salaries provided to them by Fortune 500 companies. Is that a roundabout way of admitting that you're wrong and open source can be sustainable?
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Not even close, because those developers are employees from Fortune 500 companies in one way or the other, they are not being paid by other developers paying to use Linux based software as such.
      - laughinghan 7y ago
        I don't understand. "Not even close to sustainable", you say, then complete the sentence by describing the situation in which Linux has been and continues to be sustainable.
        pjmlp 7y ago