@aral@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem Ok, SOMEONE has to pay for the whole thing. Why not take Google's money? We should be slurping up all the revenue possible from the greedy capitalists, to empower as much OSS goodness as possible. Everyone needs to eat and pay rent; and events are expensive to produce.
@aral@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem Recommended a friend to go to fosdem to find people who didn't like facebook & co. Felt a bit embarrassed when she showed me the sponsors page.
@melissawm@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem I reject the premise of the question. There are other sources of funding. But FOSSDEM isn’t about #foss. It should really be called #OSSDEM. Then I wouldn’t have any reason to criticise because we already know “open source” is about business and Google being the main sponsor is just par for the course for open source. But when you bring “freedom” into it… well, I expect higher standards, at least.
@aral@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem honest question: I don't like big techs either. In the absence of any other source of funding, how do you suggest open source/free projects and events sustain themselves?
@melissawm@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem You can (a) stay within your means and charge for entry like we did with the international conference we organised when we were just getting started, for example )https://ind.ie/archive/summit/) (b) get sponsorship form organisations that aren’t surveillance capitalists. Amazingly, they do exist.
@aral@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem can you point to any other sources of funding? For events, I'm not aware of anything other than grants from tech philanthropists or big techs. Never seen anything else...
@melissawm@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem I was going to say people world never stand for a climate change event being sponsored by ExxonMobil, for example, but we’re seeing even worse with #COP28 so maybe this is just the stage of capitalism we’re in and everything is bullshit and I’m just being silly.
@brunogirin@melissawm@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem FOSDEM is what it is. You’re not going to be able to replace the kind of funding Google provides unless you get another Google. It’s like Mozilla is what it is. You’re not going to be able to replace half a billion from Google with another source that isn’t equally bad. What we should be doing is (a) seeing these for what they are (b) funding alternatives differently
You highlight the key problem: "in the absence of any other source of funding". It looks like we need to find other sources of funding and grow them enough that they can provide an alternative. Neither is easy, it will take time and the earlier we start talking about it, the earlier we can get there.
@aral@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem not silly, but I have to say while I'd love to see a sustainable future without them, right now it feels like being stuck with their money. It's OK if you have other means, not everybody is that lucky unfortunately
@melissawm But what exactly is being discussed? Only those things that people who are fine with having Google as the cornerstone sponsor are willing to discuss. Not the things that people who are not fine with it would be discussing because they will not be there and allow their legitimacy to be used to whitewash a surveillance capitalist.
@wouter Hmm, we should tell Google’s shareholders that Google is not upholding their fiduciary duty to them then. Although those Google folks seem to be quite intelligent… I wonder if there’s something else they’re getting that we’re not considering?
@aral Why does FOSDEM have cornerstone sponsors? Because not enough people donate to be able to do away with them.
What does Google get for sponsoring? Their name is mentioned on the website, in the closing credits of video recordings, in the opening and closing talks. That's it, nothing more.
@wouter (Let’s put it this way… if you were Greenpeace, you’d never have ExxonMobil sponsoring your conference. No matter how much people donated or didn’t. Because it goes against everything you stand for. And any event that purports to care about the environment but has ExxonMobil as primary sponsor either doesn’t really care about the environment or about greenwashing ExxonMobil. In case I need to spell it out, you’re Greenpeace and Google is ExxonMobil. Only you’re not Greenpeace.)
@aral Did I disagree with any of your article's points? How do you pay your bills—where does your income come from? Have you tried support a family on OSS grant funds? Secured funding to enable others to work on OSS? I spent three years doing it. The funding is not there from ethical sources, to sustain OSS. So you can hold to ideals, or you can take the money so better software gets made—which can deliver results to put the Googles & the Metas out of business. @opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem
@ninavizz@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem So here’s the thing, I couldn’t take money from surveillance capitalists even if I wanted to because they rather dislike being called surveillance capitalists. So the only way I could take money from Google is if I said “Hey, guys, I was wrong, Google aren’t a threat to human rights or democracy.” (And actually, that would be worth *a lot* of money if I did that. But then I wouldn’t be me.)
@ninavizz@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem To answer your question: we did a round of crowdfunding ten years ago (mistake; not the way to fund ongoing work), then I sold two apartments my family has in Turkey. That kept us going for a while. Then I made a tracker blocker and sold licenses to that on Apple’s platforms. Then we ran out of money so Laura started contacting so I could continue building the Small Web. And that’s where we are.
@ninavizz@opensourcedesign@simulo@fosdem So yes, it’s hard. Damn hard. Pick between your principles and afford having a family hard. But I can’t do anything else. I’d rather starve than legitimise a bloody people farmer like Google or Meta. And we haven’t gotten a single bloody cent from the EU or grants (not for lack of trying). Going forward, my goal is to hopefully make us sustainable by being one of (hopefully many) Small Web hosts.
@aral Germany seems to be good with funding public tech; but, I'm also American. So for me its healthcare, housing, and food, and the same for my retired/elderly parents. And my disabled partner. Honestly, I took thousands in funding from the USG to do work on projects that openly oppose their policies. Really, you'd be surprised what funders either don't notice, or don't care about. TY for all you've done, it sounds like A LOT!! @simulo@fosdem
And here’s hoping we can change things for the better so folks in the future have more options and so we can fund technology for the common good from the commons.
I tried to get the folks at the EU Parliament to understand that a few years ago but I’m not sure it had any effect whatsoever.
@aral OMG lookit you—WOW, you got IN FRONT OF the dang Parliament! Congrats!! Honestly, tech used to be all about the common good. More of it, than not. My dad was a tech exec in the 1980s, and it was a very different world, then. He was so excited when I left for-profit, and then was almost more bummed-out than I was, when I had to return to it. All of us fighting to make it better, tho, make his generation proud. VERY proud, fwiw. Please know that! <3 @simulo@fosdem