Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Krita fund has no corporate support

fund.krita.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 223 posts

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#181

Post by orblivion »

VyseofArcadia wrote: post #179
orblivion wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

`padLeft` can't just inject itself into a software stack right? So there's an incentive to be valuable enough to be included.

Depends on how you do the accounting. "Well, you don't use padLeft, but 15 packages you depend on do, and 68 packages tjat those packages depend on do... Altogether you're looking at 348 instances of padLeft."

If there were a metric that would make each instance of padLeft worth a tiny amount of money (for such a tiny library), that sounds like a reasonable outcome to me.

EDIT: I may be missing part of the point

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#182

Post by natpalmer1776 »

moralestapia wrote: post #160
natpalmer1776 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to web.archive.org they had their 'starter' subscription priced at $30,000/year for 50 developers as of December 18th, 2022.

Whoa, that's very likely way more than what these organizations spend supporting OSS, lol.

Well this is designed for enumerating supply chains in a strict compliance focused environment, not necessarily for giving back to said supply chain.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#183

Post by [deleted] »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #31
masukomi wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it should be noted that european developer salaries are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than US ones. US dev salaries have been completely skewed by stupid levels of VC money. European ones not so much.

Alternatively they've been completely skewed by the profit margins of the big software companies, where it turns out they print money regardless of how high payroll gets. As supporting evidence, VC funded startups pay less than said software companies. It's interesting that Europe has abjectly failed to produce anything like Google or Meta. I'm not sure what the underlying reason for that is.

[deleted]

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#184

Post by orbital-decay »

raincole wrote: post #18

I'm migrating from Krita to Photoshop lately. Don't get me wrong, I love Krita. I used it for years and I wrote ~30+ bug reports. It's a positive thing -- I won't bother reporting bugs to Adobe cause I know they don't care, unlike Krita devs. However every time I need to collaborate with someone else, they use Photoshop. They use .psd like it's an interchangeable format[1]. Out of 10+ artists I've only seen one who d…

What kind of work do you do? The primary use case for Krita is digital painting, where a lot of artists use CSP/Procreate and typical pipelines allow certain freedom of choice. I used to work with 2D artists, and perfect PS compatibility was a deal breaker everywhere except for digital painting.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#185

Post by bee_rider »

martypitt wrote: post #133
lars_francke wrote: post #7

I want someone to build this: SBOM (Software Bill of Materials) are slowly becoming ubiquitus around the world due to regulation. I want to be able to aggregate all SBOMs within my company, have a small tool that scans my machine and creates a SBOM for all Open Source tools I use (e.g. Firefox, VLC etc.), uploads that to my corporate registry. This data is then submitted to a donation aggregator which analyzes those…

I've been toying with an idea of some kind of "Spotify for OSS" kinda thing - where software authors can make their binaries available, provided you have an active subscription (with the Spotify for OSS service). Funds are then distributed based on usage (trackable at the package registry). The idea being corporates buy a single license per head, rather than dealing with lots of donations etc. Probably lots of reason…

This seems like an easy way for people to accidentally change the nature of their projects from a personal hobby/community type thing to something more like a customer service type relationship, which brings a bunch of expectations regarding fitness and merchantability.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#186

Post by Liquix »

pavon wrote: post #171

At my workplace a common theme is that folks that use a piece of software heavily as part of their job use the big professional tools both because it is worth paying more for a better tool considering how much value they get out of it, and because it aids in collaborating for everyone to use the same tools. People who only use a tool occasionally are the ones using Paint.net, Krita, Inkspace, Audacity, etc. Part of t…

Absolutely. But sometimes the best in class tool is open source (see: ffmpeg), resulting in a win-win-win for the accounting department, for the developer freed from bureaucracy, and for open source as a whole. It would be nice to live in a world where this was the case more often.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#187

Post by bee_rider »

orblivion wrote: post #181
VyseofArcadia wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on how you do the accounting. "Well, you don't use padLeft, but 15 packages you depend on do, and 68 packages tjat those packages depend on do... Altogether you're looking at 348 instances of padLeft."

If there were a metric that would make each instance of padLeft worth a tiny amount of money (for such a tiny library), that sounds like a reasonable outcome to me. EDIT: I may be missing part of the point

A trivial way to exploit this kind of system, I think, would be to write LegitimatelyUsefulLibrary, then write 1,000 PadLeft projects, and make LegitimatelyUsefulLibrary depend on all of them.

Since you are the one marking the dependency of LegitimatelyUsefulLibrary on your PadLeft projects, you can game the metrics however you’d like when making it.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#188

Post by hinkley »

lars_francke wrote: post #7

I want someone to build this: SBOM (Software Bill of Materials) are slowly becoming ubiquitus around the world due to regulation. I want to be able to aggregate all SBOMs within my company, have a small tool that scans my machine and creates a SBOM for all Open Source tools I use (e.g. Firefox, VLC etc.), uploads that to my corporate registry. This data is then submitted to a donation aggregator which analyzes those…

I would settle for something much simpler.

All of your engineers get 5,10 votes for important libraries they use. The vote history is aggregated, and voting is twice a year. For every N votes we send $100 to that project. That way you’re not cutting little checks, and you have a finite number of projects you have to hunt down funding contacts and charitable status for.

Due to aggregation across votes, all the projects that perpetually come in 10th to 20th place get paid every year or two, and first place is likely to see a little more money each year. $300 in June and $400 in December for instance.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#189

Post by sofixa »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #176
johnnyanmac wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scale seems relative here, no? Scaling to serve a few nearby countries is still some sort of scale, just not worldwide scale.

Economies of scale can plateau, yes. In those cases I’d argue there’s a niche for a medium-sized company. (Most law is in this category.) But if there are further economies of scale, the company that seizes the worldwide market will simply have lower costs and more R&D capital to work with.

> the company that seizes the worldwide market will simply have lower costs

Not necessarily. Let's imagine a company that does budgeting and bank account centralisation, sold as a SaaS. A global company has to work on integrations with banks all around the world, data privacy regulations all around the world, translations including in right to left languages, fun stuff like UPI in India, cash payments to a machine in Japan, currency conversions etc. Meanwhile a Bulgarian startup in that space only needs to interface with the 15 local banks and use EU-mandated APIs that make their lives easier (all integrations are the same), and provide only one language, one currency. They don't need employees policies for 50 different countries, with local HR and legal departments/subcontractors everywhere. Not to mention layers of management to scale.

Do you still think the global company will have lower costs?

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#190

Post by doctorpangloss »

pavon wrote: post #171

At my workplace a common theme is that folks that use a piece of software heavily as part of their job use the big professional tools both because it is worth paying more for a better tool considering how much value they get out of it, and because it aids in collaborating for everyone to use the same tools. People who only use a tool occasionally are the ones using Paint.net, Krita, Inkspace, Audacity, etc. Part of t…

> From the corporate perspective, the tool is completely off their radar because their employees are using it to intentionally bypass corporate bureaucracy.

If something is priced cheaply enough to be paid for out of pocket by an "individual contributor," but for a work purpose, that's a big deal.

The bigger takeaway is that all seemingly B2B software is still B2C in disguise.

On the other hand, the kind, smart people making Krita aren't in it to run a sales pipeline. Like even if the diehard, nonparticipating libertarian rationalists are right, if it's true that every person on Earth would happily be a billionaire, most people think sales isn't fun or meaningful.

If you want to make the world more meaningful in your own way, I appreciate that the limit of fundraising to that goal is donations.

Post reply on HN