I think this speaks more to the entitlement of government bureaucrats and less to a decline in open source, although the point is valid and taken. They do make

I think this speaks more to the entitlement of government bureaucrats and less to a decline in open source, although the point is valid and taken. They do make another good point about the different types of open source projects, that about sums up the open source world. Still, I don't think it's struggling at all. I build things I want to use for myself that don't already exist, or things I want to see in the world. I take donations, though I've never received any, but I have never complained about that. I'll get them when I get them, when something I want to build is compelling enough. The contributions I get are other people building things I use, or contributing to things I maintain. In fact, I have a policy of not maintaining things I build but don't use (besides pull requests), I think of it as giving a community of people who do use it a head start on their development, and if no community forms that wants it to continue to exist, oh well. I also have a policy of not adding features at user request, though I do build things to be feature complete within scope, even with features I don't personally use. My goal with everything I build is to show people what's possible and to give them a gift that can improve their lives if they want it, not to support some type of infrastructure for eternity. I'm happy with that. I'm not struggling, or chronically underfunded, or overworked, I'm just expressing my creativity and building for the sake of building. And I think there's enough of that in the world that this open source thing will continue to do just fine, so long as we take seriously the whole "no implied warranty or fitness for purpose, I don't owe you anything" ethos we put into our licenses.