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

211–220 of 223 posts

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#211

Post by noworriesnate »

bee_rider wrote: post #187
orblivion wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But why would I, as a developer, use such a library? It would cut me out of profits unnecessarily. In fact when I’m picking my dependencies I will deliberately avoid those that take a larger slice of the pie than is worth it for me.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#212

Post by wahnfrieden »

cpach wrote: post #125
wahnfrieden wrote: post #61

I use this instead of Acorn/Gimp/etc now for regular web image editing (for app dev)

Cool. I haven’t used Krita, but I’ve always thought of it as a painting tool. But apparently it can do more than that!

Yes I use it only for simple utility work. It has nice advanced features that help sometimes.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#213

Post by kfichter »

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…

Not quite the same thing, but the Optimism Collective runs a program called Retroactive Public Goods Funding that sort of works like this: https://www.optimism.io/retropgf

A round is currently active and dependencies are encouraged to sign up. Quite literally millions worth of crypto up for grabs for the ecosystem's dependencies on a recurring basis. Frequency is about twice per year right now but I think the goal is to get to at least once per quarter.

(Disclaimer: I work for a company called OP Labs which does work for the Optimism Collective)

(And yes, it's a crypto project, but I'm hoping the common goal of constructing systems that can sustainably fund open source software might bridge the HN gap)

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#214

Post by cornholio »

orlandohill wrote: post #175
cornholio wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are irrevocable, but they also disallow commercial redistribution of modified copies - in perpetuity. This means that when the original vendor changes new versions of the software to a draconic proprietary license (as is their right as the full owner of the copyright), the community can't fork an older version and keep it up to date and distribute that; they can just use older versions until they become obsolete…

The commercial license typically grants the right to sublicense the software as part of a larger piece of software that can be sold commercially. Both commercial and non-commercial users can copy, modify, and redistribute modified and unmodified copies. Again, there is no lock-in. There's little incentive for the developers to switch from dual commercial/non-commercial licensing of the source code to only distributin…

> Both commercial and non-commercial users can copy, modify, and redistribute modified and unmodified copies.

I don't follow. Both examples you provided explicitly forbid commercial redistribution:

  The Prosperity Public License 3.0.0
  license allows you to use *and share this software for noncommercial purposes for free* and to try this software for commercial purposes for thirty days
  [no other distribution allowances are made in the rest of the license]


  PolyForm Noncommercial License 1.0.0
  Your license to distribute covers distributing the software with changes and new works permitted by *Changes and New Works License*.
  Changes and New Works License: The licensor grants you an additional copyright license to make changes and new works based on the software *for any permitted purpose*.
  [Complete list of permitted purposes]
  "Any noncommercial purpose" ; "Personal use ... without any anticipated commercial application"; "Noncommercial Organizations"
So both licenses disallow distribution if done for a commercial purpose. Do you mean to say that you can dual license, under such a non-commercial license and also under an open license, that allows commercial distribution? But then, how would you discourage commercial users from simply downloading and using the open source version? We're back to the service model of financing open source.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#215

Post by lars_francke »

zoogeny wrote: post #170
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 think the devil is in the details. As others have pointed out, this would drastically change the incentive structure of OSS. You would attract actors whose entire purpose would be to get listed on as many SBOMs as possible to maximize their revenue potential. I'm envisioning a world of `padLeft` controversies. That is to say, I don't think a pure "frequency of use" metric is sufficient to fairly distribute such a p…

Everything you say is correct. I still want this. It's better than what we have today.

We can work on improving things later.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#216

Post by kybernetikos »

orblivion wrote: post #174
zoogeny wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the devil is in the details. As others have pointed out, this would drastically change the incentive structure of OSS. You would attract actors whose entire purpose would be to get listed on as many SBOMs as possible to maximize their revenue potential. I'm envisioning a world of `padLeft` controversies. That is to say, I don't think a pure "frequency of use" metric is sufficient to fairly distribute such a p…

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

If I remember the story correctly the padLeft dev was actually pretty notorious for submitting patches to open source projects that 'coincidentally' added dependencies on his code.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#217

Post by libraryatnight »

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…

I don't ever really collaborate, so I had come to comment that I recently switched to Krita and have really been enjoying it. Between Krita, Gimp, and Blender once I swap some fonts in places I can drop my Adobe sub which has at least been dropped to the minimum package.

I switched because it seems like it's important to use and support open source tools wherever possible, proprietary software is feeling more and more hostile to the user. I'm redirecting the money I was spending on Adobe products to open source donations.

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#218

Post by orlandohill »

cornholio wrote: post #214
orlandohill wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The commercial license typically grants the right to sublicense the software as part of a larger piece of software that can be sold commercially. Both commercial and non-commercial users can copy, modify, and redistribute modified and unmodified copies. Again, there is no lock-in. There's little incentive for the developers to switch from dual commercial/non-commercial licensing of the source code to only distributin…

> Both commercial and non-commercial users can copy, modify, and redistribute modified and unmodified copies. I don't follow. Both examples you provided explicitly forbid commercial redistribution: The Prosperity Public License 3.0.0 license allows you to use *and share this software for noncommercial purposes for free* and to try this software for commercial purposes for thirty days [no other distribution allowances…

Those are examples of non-commercial licenses, licenses that grant rights, free of charge, but restrict commercial use of software.

When I say dual licensing, I am referring to the business model of offering software for free under a non-commercial license, and charging for commercial usage rights. Kyle E. Mitchell calls this Free-and-Paid Dual Licensing.

https://writing.kemitchell.com/2023/09/10/Two-Kinds-Dual-Lic...

To use such a business model you also need a commercial license. There's no one-size-fits-all solution, and it's normally something that requires input from a legal professional. Kyle has made a couple of recent efforts to improve things.

https://fastpathlicense.com/ https://commercial.polyformproject.org/

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#219

Post by qwerty456127 »

Spivak wrote: post #90
qwerty456127 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Then your boss will come and ask WTF do you use VLC for when all the videos are on the web, also some default media player comes with your OS and by the way, you are not supposed to watch videos during…

Wild, I should be more appreciative that I have Steam on my work laptop and have played Slay The Spire during deploys with management on the call commenting on my game.

You don't need Steam for this. It's available on GOG[1] without DRM.

[1] https://www.gog.com/game/Slay_the_Spire

Re: Krita fund has no corporate support

#220

Post by redeeman »

raincole wrote: post #35
sweatypalmer wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a stupid question, but if Krita can read/write .psd then why does this matter?

Because just like the most "open source app reading/writing proprietary format" scenarios, it doesn't do it perfectly. Even if you simply import a .psd and re-export it again as-is, it will still break things like smart objects and layer blending options. It's not Krita's fault: .psd is not an interchangeable format. Implementing .psd support perfectly is basically implementing the whole PS itself. It's all the artis…

> Krita makes my days difficult.

Or maybe the huge goliath that gives less than 0 shits about interoperability makes it difficult?

Post reply on HN