@gbraad @lupyuen This is for Sponsors that aren't individual people. GitHub has to make a profit, handle the service and ensure that good results are the outcome.
The fees are a bargain considering that GitHub is providing a service that would be equivalent to a software company.
It will be interesting to see what the developers actually get paid.
@niclas @gbraad @lupyuen Another option is leveraging the existing Open Source projects and charging money to make them viable solutions for Companies. Libre Office would be a good solution compared to Office fees. GNU/Octave would be a good replacement for Matlab if it could compete with the add-ons used in Engineering.
Corporations are scared of change but they could save a large amount by using such a service. The source code would be added to the projects too. It would be custom code intended for a single corporation but it would still be useful. This approach puts the programmers in control of software. A group of programmers doesn't own the code and sell licenses.
This would be a better model than owning code as it is driven by goods and services. With more code being paid for it could rather quickly outcompete the model that uses illusions. Only a corporation owns a closed source software and they sell a license to use it. With Open Source, technically there is an owner but it belongs to everyone as they can actually have the product.
Nothing is perfect but this model does something unique and that is the equivalent of an arms race in development where breakthroughs are released instead of hoarded. Unprecedented advances would be made.
@AmpBenzScientist
My prediction; almost no projects will get any substantial funding.
IMHO, there is only one solid way to make money on open source projects as an individual; get involved in promising project and hope to get hired by a company that can commercialize that project.
But unfortunately, the majority of good projects don't have that kind of importance.
@gbraad @lupyuen