> Which is why maintainers feel like they’re drowning.
How about actually funding opensource project mantainers? We have non profit orgs, that eat billions of public funds. We spend biilions for influencing hardly measurable metrics, with very nebulous benefits in far distant future.
Direct sponsoring of critical projects would have far better and concrete benefits.
This plus accountability is the way; and what I think I mean here is "accountability for those who choose to USE (maybe not create) the software in a way that may be harmful."
If you'd like to push that accountability to the developers, that can work, but they should be paid or otherwise compensated accordingly for the risk they take on.
I’d just like to thank the author for giving the correct t reason for the Winchester Mystery House instead of just blindly repeating the “she went crazy” line story as truth.
Does anyone know what “agent tea” is in the second graph? There is a paper about a protocol but it seems a bit obscure to be featured in this context and the other two points on the graph are models.
The cathedral and bazaar simply isn't the magic this article treats it as. And ESR, a human molerat who publicly premeditates murder on his blog, certainly isn't either.
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2024/08/the-truth-about-sallie...
How about actually funding opensource project mantainers? We have non profit orgs, that eat billions of public funds. We spend biilions for influencing hardly measurable metrics, with very nebulous benefits in far distant future.
Direct sponsoring of critical projects would have far better and concrete benefits.
If you'd like to push that accountability to the developers, that can work, but they should be paid or otherwise compensated accordingly for the risk they take on.
Winchester Mystery Potemkin Village.