5 ms·
The interesting part is: > I was soon shocked to learn that the Foundation spent nearly $800,000 last year. $0 of that went to Processing 4. [...] This year, t
by didibus 3y ago
The interesting part is:
> I was soon shocked to learn that the Foundation spent nearly $800,000 last year. $0 of that went to Processing 4. [...] This year, the proposed Foundation budget is around $1.2 million. But for Processing, there is budget for just two people: one developer, one community lead.
Basically he feels like the donation money should go towards further development of Processing itself, but the foundation seems to be spending it on other stuff, and not on continuing or accelerating the development of Processing itself.
- lelanthran 3y agoAnyone knows what the "other stuff" is?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 15457345234 3y agoFrom: https://processingfoundation.org/ https://processingfoundation.org/ "We invite you to meditate on digital fragmentation and infrastructure that lays its foundation through the global white capitalist, colonialist, and imperialist framework we live in today through our Land and Digital Acknowledgements." tl;dr: divisive nonsense
- mvelbaum 3y agoSounds like commie gobbledygook to me.
- fleshdaddy 3y agoYeah it’s really bizarre. It reminds me of times when I’ve gone to a charities website and things start getting weird and eventually I realize it’s run by some religious cult. Sucks though, seems like at a certain point you should just be honest that you are more interested in social issues so that people who want to support the actual development of processing know your foundation isn’t the way to do so.
- 15457345234 3y ago> at a certain point you should just be honest Yeah but then nobody will give you $10M in crypto
- fleshdaddy 3y agoI don’t know tbh I’d assume those people donate because they made some money off of the work done on processing and want to give some back to keep development going. I’d think if you wanted to donate to the stuff they’re on about you’d find a non profit specifically for that purpose. I’m sure there are plenty and they’re probably better at it than a software foundation haha.
- 15457345234 3y agoYeah, on further examination it looks like a lot of NFT artists created work using processing and have kicked it back, which explains why the donations were so crypto-heavy. It was giving odd vibes for a bit but it seems cool.
- tonyg 3y agoIt's right there on the homepage. What more do you want?
- boppo1 3y ago>should just be honest that you are more interested in social issues so that people who want to support the actual development of processing know your foundation isn’t the way to do so. That's a feature, not a bug.
- sterlingcrispin 3y agoIronically, not paying the producers and maintainers of the code is classic capitalism.
- wellthisisgreat 3y agoI read the whole thing and Jesus Christ this is atrocious. Can’t imagine what it feels like to found a framework that became a driving force behind “creative coding” and watch it taken over by indoctrinated zealots who don’t care about the craft and the art of programming, and waste resources on social posturing.
- millzlane 3y agoIt reads like it was written by a person who does not seek to divide.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Propelloni 3y agoFrom the main page of [1] > Every year, we support and sponsor programs that nurture diverse communities and their projects. Our programs include: * A Fellowship and Teaching Fellowship Program that funds exploratory, creative, and technical research * An Advocacy Program that partners with organizations for projects * Public events that provide platforms for collaboration between our contributors, such as panels and talks that spread the word about the need for equity in these fields * Summer programs to support emerging coders throughout the world [1] https://processingfoundation.org/ https://processingfoundation.org/ EDITed: linebreaks
- LunaSea 3y agoThe usual racket
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cbhl 3y agoI'm under the impression that a 501c3 _can't_ spend its money on developers working on FOSS while being 100% tax deductible because of the US tax code; makes one wonder whether it would be worthwhile to lobby/organize to get that changed.
- 15457345234 3y agoCan you elaborate as to how you arrived at that conclusion?
- john-radio 3y agoNaively, because it might help more pro-social and FOSS software get made?
- 15457345234 3y agoThats... what? Is that a reply to my comment or just markov chaining?
- mrbonner 3y agoI think DEI initiatives.
- throwoutway 3y agoTo be frank, the donors likely think their donor money should go towards further development of Processing itself. That's why they're donating to THAT foundation
- thrown37291 3y agoNot really. Processing Foundation today is much wider than just the Processing software. A lot of people interact with Processing Foundation through workshops, teaching and p5 without ever touching the original Processing software.
- whywhywhywhy 3y ago>A lot of people interact with Processing Foundation through workshops, teaching This work touches probably less than 1% what P5 and Processing do yet takes up the majority of the budget seemingly.
- thrown37291 3y agop5js is one of the most popular toolkits today for teaching creative coding and is used across schools and universities all over the world, so education and community outreach has become a huge part of the ecosystem. “Processing” as a global and worldwide community would not exist today if the only focus of the budget was on the original Java software.
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoP5 is what I mostly use. How much of the budget did P5 get, how many developers are there? My argument is for spending money on making software that affects millions not spending it mostly on fellowships that affect 12 people or workshops and talks that affect 40.
- 15457345234 3y ago> p5js is one of the most popular toolkits today for teaching creative coding How much of the budget was p5js support/development assigned, how many developers are currently working on it, how many man/hours of development have gone into it over the past two years?