How do you decide which open source projects are worthy of taxpayer money, and how much does a given project get?
I have a couple projects I’ve put up in GitHub as open source. Would they qualify? Or are you just talking about well known open source projects like Linux?
I’m sure many people could point to hundreds of dangers around open-source programs relying on government funding. Yet, I can’t argue that it seems to be a necessity.
Open source should be funded by the tax-payers, or all code should be forcibly open-source (something like AGPL)
Any other models feels like they would create perverse incentives
Also recurring donations feels like a better way than one-time tips
How do you decide which open source projects are worthy of taxpayer money, and how much does a given project get?
I have a couple projects I’ve put up in GitHub as open source. Would they qualify? Or are you just talking about well known open source projects like Linux?
Same as all other tax funded projects, by some elected people who likely have no idea about the project.
Joking aside, we will see more of this funding due to governments moving to open source software as they tend to want to fund their own stuff.
By which country?
Saudi Arabia.
All of them? Maybe an international consortium that pays devs in their home currency.
I’m sure many people could point to hundreds of dangers around open-source programs relying on government funding. Yet, I can’t argue that it seems to be a necessity.
I mean, look what happened with TCP/IP.
A fucking disaster for humanity on a global scale
???
So what’s the problem with those protocols?