[amelius]

We need funding of OS projects like how science is funded. Letting a company do it is not a good idea.

Not saying that science funding is perfect.

[hellerve]

I think companies or individuals contributing money to projects they rely on is great, and I personally do it and incentivize OSS development in my own consulting practice (through lower fees and philanthropy).

Now, should it be the main source of income for an OSS project, especially when it’s “critical infrastructure” (let’s just pretend that term is well defined and means whatever it means to each of us)? Probably not, and there should probably be a better way.

Whether science funding in particular is a good model I would debate, since it can be such a beauty pageant at times.

[kylebyproxy]

I always pictured FOSS funding coming from the NEA or perhaps a brand new endowment for technology

[hutzlibu]

Are you involved in how science gets funded?

I am not, but what I know is, it involves lots of buerocracy and still lets lots of science unfunded. But this is understandable, as science is unlimited and the question remains, who decides what is worth funding? And remember that funding is tax payer money.