Follow

re: free/libre/open software funding, I was aware of SPI, Open Collective, etc., and then bytecommons.com/ by the dev behind caramel.run

Is there any approach to splitting the funding among contributors? If proof-of-stake blockchains are not garbage, maybe a maintainers blockchain with coins/patch and the value of all coins = revenue?

Apologies for cold-calling, @treefit @saulpw

@tetrislife
I personally think fiat currency is fine, you should trust the people that accept and manage your donations anyway. Also the barrier for normies to pay crypto if they have no experience with it is probably so hard, that less people would even donate.

Also Blockchain has a bad image for all the scams and get-rich-quick crap.
(I like the idea of crypto currency in principle, but if most people use it in that way I get sceptical)

Fiat is simpler for tax reasons and not volatile. 🤷

@tetrislife If you got a grant from #nlnet they can transfer the divided money to the people directly.

In any case I think finding a fair sharing/splitting model of the money is the more important part.

Open Collective seems nice to work with. SPI is rather bureaucratic I heard, so processes might take their time.

I haven't heard of byte commons before, thanks for sharing.

@tetrislife Smart contracts on ETH would also sound interesting, but I know too little about the technology.

Also again the question is what problem you would solve with it.

Blockchain is a tool to remove trust,

I doubt that trust is the first problem you have with funding,

especially because crypto has the downside of making these things harder:
- taxes
- getting donations initially
- planning, because the exchange rate changes so fast

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.