Never Criticize The Linux Foundation Expenses

36 thoughts on “Never Criticize The Linux Foundation Expenses”

• OK, conspiracy tin-hat theory inbound – what if the reason these companies ARE with the Linux Foundation is to divert money away from the Linux Desktop? Huh? Huh? MS must have some clout!

  I'm struggling to find a reason to be honest, because the actual name of the foundation is so misleading. I think they should change it to keep the foundation consistent with what they do. And as said previously, if they are interested in Linux, it's from a server standpoint, as it's the dominant OS on the market. Aww, come on, wet my beak over here!

• Remember, everyone, do not be cringe – going after and attacking people is cringe, do not be the cringelord

  With that said, budgeting is one of those things every auditing thing fear, for good reason

  No reason why people should be silenced from complaining about the foundation's bullshit

• Those leftist foundations doing this everywhere… they give money to other leftist movements. They cannot keep it in one topic and sure, we all others are nazis yep.

• These person-shaped corporate cork-suckers amuse me every time they "expressed their feelings" of being butt-hurt because somebody has a opposing opinion compared to them. There's this, then there's the Humane AI, and then there's other corporate products that they would staunchly defend even though they wouldn't earn anything other than their self-righteous feelings being "vindicated" on their own terms.

• Anyone opinion that involves pumping money into GNOME is automatically an invalid, dating back from at least GNOME 3.6 forcing crappy ibus onto instead of listening to us and adapting a input method framework's framework for all of input method frameworks out there to interface with.

• You mean Richard “You don’t need a firewall because I say so” Brown? He’s an a$$.

• Funding from them would really help a lot

• The underlying real issue is a doozie: outside of a few privately held companies, academic and military institutions, all of FOSS is essentially a parasite on the big-tech meta-organism.

  Consider how long projects like OpenOffice or wine+ROS have toiled in relative obscurity without (ime) ever achieving value-proposition parity with MS equivalents of 25 years ago. You start to appreciate just how much vision and labor power MS was able to marshal back then (obviously not anymore; MS has clearly decided to let these productivity verticals bit-rot).

  Point is, it takes a bunch of money to do some stuff. There's only so much thankless drudgery someone is going to want to take on as a volunteer. When crowd sourcing doesn't work, what can we do, but sell out? Apparently, not much.

• They could rename themselves to "Linux Industry Group" or something like that, so the regular schmoe doesn't get the wrong idea before donating.

• The name itself is the issue more like "big tech pocket money fundation"

• I remember when the donation page for the linux foundation said that the money goes to the linux developers such as linus, and then at the end of the text it said that 100% of donations go to diversity and inclusion efforts

• With Microsoft as Platinum how is going to be funding the Desktop Development important

• At this point the situation is similar to a fraud. People (at least some of them) are donating their money on Linux not knowing they'll get spent on AI marketing bullshit with beautiful presentations and flowcharts. Pure criminal activity.

• AWS silver supporter ….

• Hmm, a deep dive into the foundation would be interesting to see.

  The Linux desktop is not "free" but a fortunate side effect of the fact that everyone benefits economically if basic server infrastructure is free.

  Like Linux is not a commie organization, they're largely funded by big tech partners the last time I read up on it.

• Like any big none profit its a massive grift.

• corporate vampires

• I am more convinced of my belief that small or underfunded open source projects that are critical to cyber security or even national security in general (given how many open source projects are used in essential inftastructure) should be publicly funded by governments through some independent grants body preferably as a joint multi-national effort, given how much bs governments spend on citing national security interests, this might be one of the better things they could do. I like to view those open source projects as common infrastructure like roads, canals, electricity poles etc which everyone wants to use but few people would actually bother regularly maintaining out of the goodness of their own hearts, passion or a sense of duty and the like, until something goes catastrophically wrong. You certainly can't trust commericial interests to maintain them beyond whatever is visible to them and they think is necessary for their profit motive.

• I like the way the Linux Foundation operates. Although it probably shouldn't call itself the Linux Foundation, the role it fulfills as a joint venture run by the majority of the market focusing on establishing a solid, open foundation for all of their projects is a useful one.

• Lmao Richard L

• Im gonna harass richard from my burners.

• Let's create a Linux desktop foundation that supports Gnome and KDE projects from desktop to apps. Possibly other desktops to. Also spend money on important projects that gets little or no funding.

• I am not sure if i understand the other side of the argument to be honest ..maybe if i read his tweets in full i'd see it a slightly different way but … I just happen to agree with you Brodie … that is not to say any of these things they ARE funding are "bad" just because they are funding them but the "Linux Foundation" in my mind should do what you said .. .fund different desktops and say different libraries that in some cases "hold Linux together" .. the one like (pre issues) xz just like you said … one dev .. .over worked … burning out … show them some love and funding for what they do, MAKING LINUX BETTER

• I strongly disagree that donating money randomly is a good idea, the big part is finding where the money would be most useful and I think there needs to be an "I need help" hotline for FOSS.

• As someone with a big megaphone for you not to be mentioning resources, like a forum, where burnt out maintainers can get assistance and some intelligence agency(for deep background checks and spy stuff assuming moles are going to dig on this) can work to find someone to pass the mantel too… Is rich enough to spend our way out of this mess.

• 11:42 I'm one of these ppl and I strongly disagree money will help. From what I knew, FOSS was by volunteers for volunteers.

• After getting my first job i donated twice to Wikipedia and once to KDE. Now waiting for another job😅

• 11:10 For XZ… The problem was clearly nobody knew there was a problem, the project laced advertising on it's existence and status. If you don't advertise you exist and need money, no pool of money no matter how large will magically discover you exist and distribute some to you.

• Brodie ignore the fool. Lunduke for all his faults said something profound the other day in the lines of: "it is not the job of tech journalist to sck corpo schlong but to criticize corpos and their platforms/foundations/projects/whatever.

• Honestly they probably get the big funding they get BECAUSE the serve those companies. Don't know why that guy felt the need to come at you for having an opinion. He could have just shared his opinion without the extra crap. Classic internet I guess. But I think the most meaningful/actionable thing to come out of your opinon, the tldr, is: If you want to support linux don't waste your money on the linux foundation. Pick a project to fund instead.

  I think it's worth proposing that they change their name based on the fact that it may be misleading to some regular folk who would consider donating.

• It's called tax evasion buddy. Donations are tax free so big corps always pick those foundations who will obey the interests of their donors so the big corps can invest in the projects they want through handpicked and targeted donations and pay zero taxes for it.

• Many of the sponsors of the LF have desktop environments of their own they're pushing (Microsoft, Google, etc.) and wouldn't want to improve the desktop with their funding to create a potential competitor. As for the rest of the corporate sponsors, they're mostly interested in linux server capability, so also not interested in supporting the desktop.

• So this guy is saying that it's totally normal that some big companies use the Linux Foundation to distribute money to projects they are interested in, even if it has nothing to do with Linux? It really does not look normal.

• Are you gonna cover the news that MS-DOS & WINAMP will be made "open source" ?

• Don't forget that they rescued the Servo project!

• Actually, I would like that money to go the FSF or OSI so they can fund those projects in the free software/open source direction. We need them.
  And I agree that LF needs to spend some money on the Linux Desktop.

Comments are closed.