• kadu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    253
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I agree we should support him, but you know who should be more concerned with giving him and other open source maintainers money? The billion dollar corporations that rely on these critical projects and use them absolutely for free. Amazon, Microsoft, Sony, Samsung, Google, Siemens, Motorola, God knows how many more.

      • rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        This!!!

        This!!

        People, stop celebrating “freeing” software of maintainers that want to prevent being exploited.

        • qaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          What about a license that would require every company with a market cap above 25 B that (indirectly) uses the software to contribute X amount (like $1000 a year) of revenue back?

          • paraphrand@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I think if that caught on then companies would call it undue burden to sift through all the dependencies they use to make such small payments.

            It is a difficult problem. But on the face of it your suggestion seems very reasonable.

            • qaz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              GitHub has a tool built-in to show all dependencies, it’s not that hard to write a little script to check the LICENSE files in the repositories. I’m sure one of the biggest companies in the world has the ability to do that.

            • Lmaydev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              If dual licensing was standard the software that uses things like xz would pay down the line so everything was funded.

          • Astongt615@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            I mean this is already a thing to certain degrees right? Virtualization platforms I use both are free for personal use, but not business use, or at least certain feature package use isn’t permitted. What’s the difference? Putting the software under a different license/eula?

            • qaz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yes, but the proposed license would also be free for businesses except for the largest in the world.

              • Astongt615@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Why limit it? If you’re actively making money, or you are a licensed business attempting to do so, people actively helping you build business deserve to be compensated. If a developer just happened to live in your area and said “I could make your business better by making this thing for you,” would they be worth hiring? What’s the saying, socialize the resources, privatize the profits? Size << Intent

    • aard@kyu.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      7 months ago

      He probably needs a comaintainer. We could select one of us and then try pressuring him into accepting that.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      7 months ago

      We need more non profits who can set aside funds for these projects. It not like these companies don’t want to help its just jot entirely clear how they can help.

        • Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          Sure. But if the project in question only has one or two donation methods and none of those are supported by the company, then the company can’t easily donate anything. Companies usually have a strict way of how they can donate and it usually entails Paypal or some other costly solution, while projects like that likely just has a patreon or LibrePay option and perhaps a crypto wallet. Most companies can’t work with that.

          • catnash [she/her, ae/aer]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            In my opinion it is a terrible choice for a company to rely on a dependency like XZ, especially maintained by one person as a hobby, without being able to meaningfully contribute to the maintenance themselves. I just don’t think I can be sympathetic to a company having to maybe bend a rule or two to donate.

          • catnash [she/her, ae/aer]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            This is one of the problems, these companies and other groups just use a dependency maintained by one person (Lasse) without meaningfully contributing to its survival themselves.

            • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              We just need more non profits to manage projects. If a maintainer burns out they should be able to contact some organization to find help.

        • someacnt_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Ofc I exaggerated, samsung is not a monolithic entity. I mean most, if not all, on the managerial position would not care at all. Also, does being android-like mean they are receptive to OSS?

          • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            © 2024 Tizen Project, a Linux Foundation Project. All Rights Reserved. Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.

      • TdotMatrix@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I gotta hand it to Samsung that they outline all the open source licences they use, at least in their Galaxy smartphone products: