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

Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

techrights.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 112 posts

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#41

Post by xienze »

potamic wrote: post #37
blackjack_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.

A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers who worry about incentives and technological progress, this here is a perfect (and not the only) example of how intrinsic motivation can beat extrinsic motivation by a huge margin. There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation…

> A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers

Perhaps the "billionaire sympathizers" are people who can manage to see that the bar for what is considered an unacceptable amount of wealth will keep being revised lower and lower until it affects them. Here you are already proposing that a person shouldn't be allowed to earn more than a total of a million dollars in income every year, which caps one's lifetime wealth accumulation at $40-60M[0]. Which would make anyone able to achieve anywhere close to that sum as wealthy as today's wealthiest persons. After which the next person will suggest that such a thing shouldn't be allowed for the betterment of society.

0: assuming you can start earning that much starting at age 20 and you intend on retiring between 60 to 80, so obviously the range can go up or down a bit.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#42

Post by ThePowerOfFuet »

Snild wrote: post #33
teo_zero wrote: post #32

To be fair, you should say that over 97% of the Linux Foundation's budget goes not to the Linux kernel . There's more to Linux than the kernel.

Don't let Stallman hear you say that! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy

GNU/Linux is rapidly becoming systemd/Linux at this rate...

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#43

Post by mcv »

tdeck wrote: post #2

The executive compensation is pretty shocking https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/460...

Surprised to learn that some guy I used to work with (Gabriele Columbro) is now apparently a very expensive executive director at the Linux Foundation. I had no idea his career took that turn.

I think it's the same guy, at least.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#44

Post by logicchains »

potamic wrote: post #37
blackjack_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.

A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers who worry about incentives and technological progress, this here is a perfect (and not the only) example of how intrinsic motivation can beat extrinsic motivation by a huge margin. There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation…

>There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation of extrinsic ones. Society will do well to structure itself primarily around such people.

Europe has developed no new big companies in the past two decades precisely because this isn't true. The vast majority of successful companies and products are developed by people motivated by money, and if you try to prevent them from being rewarded for their hard work then they just go somewhere where their effort is more welcome.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#45

Post by 9753268996433 »

potamic wrote: post #37
blackjack_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.

A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers who worry about incentives and technological progress, this here is a perfect (and not the only) example of how intrinsic motivation can beat extrinsic motivation by a huge margin. There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation…

[flagged]

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#46

Post by krior »

logicchains wrote: post #44
potamic wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers who worry about incentives and technological progress, this here is a perfect (and not the only) example of how intrinsic motivation can beat extrinsic motivation by a huge margin. There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation…

>There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation of extrinsic ones. Society will do well to structure itself primarily around such people. Europe has developed no new big companies in the past two decades precisely because this isn't true. The vast majority of successful companies and products are developed by people motivated by money, and if you try to…

That implies that the goal is to create big companiea.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#47

Post by apexalpha »

sysreq_ wrote: post #24

Reading through the list of projects that the Linux Foundation supports (via infrastructure, governance, events, etc) with the other 181 million is honestly shocking. They are supporting, among like a thousand others - NodeJS/OpenJS, PyTorch, Electron, K8s, vLLM, ONNX, PX4, GraphQL - plus the 'smaller' entries like Zephyr, Containerd, gRPC, KiCAD, ESLint, Fastify, etc. Their portfolio is literally insane. This is the…

Well since the Cloud Native foundation is a subsidiary of the Linux foundation this makes sense.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#48

Post by thomascountz »

logicchains wrote: post #44
potamic wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A wealth tax than caps one's inflow to something like a million a year makes a lot of sense. To all the billionaire sympathizers who worry about incentives and technological progress, this here is a perfect (and not the only) example of how intrinsic motivation can beat extrinsic motivation by a huge margin. There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation…

>There will always be people who value intrinsic incentives and even more so when there is a lack or limitation of extrinsic ones. Society will do well to structure itself primarily around such people. Europe has developed no new big companies in the past two decades precisely because this isn't true. The vast majority of successful companies and products are developed by people motivated by money, and if you try to…

   Europe has developed no new big companies in the past two decades precisely because this isn't true.
This sounds like an oversimplification and assumes "big" is on par with net good.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#49

Post by rmunn »

blackjack_ wrote: post #12
tdeck wrote: post #2

The executive compensation is pretty shocking https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/460...

Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.

> Obviously nobody needs more than that per year ...

You are, of course, in a position to know what everybody on Earth needs.

What if someone wants to give $10 million away per year to worthy charities? Will you tell them they can't?

Or... what if someone wants to own something you consider wastefully expensive? Is it your job to tell them they shouldn't? Or is it wiser to adopt the position of humility and say "Well, it's their business, not mine, what they spend their money on"?

It's easy to be motivated by envy, even when we think we aren't. It's much better for your soul, and your peace of mind, to adopt the "let them" mentality, and not decide what other people, whose lives you know nothing about, need.

Re: Over 97% of the 'Linux' Foundation's Budget Goes Not to Linux

#50

Post by apexalpha »

rmunn wrote: post #49
blackjack_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually crazy that Linus just takes home 1.5M per year for one of the largest contributions to tech of anyone in the world. Obviously nobody needs more than that per year, but this pay is 1/100 or 1/1000th of many tech executives that have contributed very little comparatively.

> Obviously nobody needs more than that per year ... You are, of course, in a position to know what everybody on Earth needs. What if someone wants to give $10 million away per year to worthy charities? Will you tell them they can't? Or... what if someone wants to own something you consider wastefully expensive? Is it your job to tell them they shouldn't? Or is it wiser to adopt the position of humility and say "Well…

There is a big difference between 'needs' and 'wants'.

I'll defend the argument no one 'needs' more than 1.5 mill per year.

I agree with you greed is endless and lots of people want more and will rationalize their hoarding while others, often in their own communities, suffer.

Post reply on HN