4 ms·
Well, the article mentions his Patreon, as well as features a GitHub Sponsors button at the end of it.
by jgilias 6y ago
Well, the article mentions his Patreon, as well as features a GitHub Sponsors button at the end of it.
- ColinEberhardt 6y agoTrue, both were mentioned in passing - but it would be good to hear about how sustainable this is? If an open source maintainer relies on GH sponsors, Patreon, Open Collective then they are going to have to invest time in marketing themselves to the community. It's an odd dynamic.
- edoceo 6y agoGotta have some hustle if you wanna get paid.
- fsewe20 6y ago..which is a real shame, as there are very talented people working on public goods who don't have that "hustle" and could do with the support. Open source / Free software has been valued over $400 billion, and supports our entire economy, funding developers shouldn't be a problem. Open source / Free software is a public goods issue, and we should be looking for the best ways to support them. Quadratic funding could be a useful mechanism for this: https://wtfisqf.com/ https://wtfisqf.com/
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoGreat if you're an extroverted narcissist, but that only represents (a small) part of the software development world.
- christiansakai 6y agoDefinitely not a sustainable model. I don't think open source will ever find a sustainable business model that can be applicable generally.
- hyperpallium2 6y agoAs public infrastructure, government funded? Lots of problems...
- deepstack 6y agoI personally think there ought to be better way to fund Anonymous developers like through Monroe or something similar. Patreon after the recent incident make me trust less and less centralised players. Seems like a power corrupt symptom