Funding Open Source?

2 months ago

Attackers targeted an old, maintained open-source package by taking over maintenance and inserting malicious code to steal cryptocurrencies.
Three models for sustaining scholarly infrastructures: taxation, byproduct, and oligopoly, as discussed in Cameron Neylon's paper.
The 'Red Hat' model exemplifies the byproduct approach, where free software is supported through paid services.
Oligopoly in open source is evident in organizations like the Linux Foundation, dominated by corporate members.
Proposal for 'community' software where users are taxed proportionally to fund maintenance, akin to public infrastructure funding.
Memecoins like $GAS and $BLEEBZORX emerged as a novel, albeit controversial, funding mechanism for projects, leveraging attention and trading fees.
Steve Yegge's Gas Town project inadvertently became a case study in memecoin financing, highlighting the risks and ethical dilemmas involved.
The memecoin model thrives on attention, with creators and promoters benefiting from trading fees and price pumps, often at the expense of uninformed investors.
Criticism of the memecoin model focuses on its resemblance to pump-and-dump schemes and the potential for financial and reputational harm.

Hasty Briefsbeta