This should be standard industry practice. Any company above a certain size should contribute financially to all software it depends on.
We used to call this “buying an enterprise license”.
Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
161–170 of 319 posts
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#162I love to see Google & Vercel start sponsoring Tailwind. But the larger question is why did it take the company laying off 75% of their staff for these major tech companies to realize they needed to sponsor? What processes are they doing to evaluate other things to sponsor before AI kills it?
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
What kind of headcount do you estimate $1MM/year can reliably support? That's like ~2 engineers at FAANG.
FAANG isn't the world. Salaries for developers are well under $150k in most of the United States, for example, and that is for senior engineers. Most startups are paying $90k-$140k for senior devs, for example (I haven't done the math, but from my own experience, $100-$120k is the general sweet spot). Larger companies pay a bit more, but move beyond that and you are talking management.
Most “senior devs” are actually bad.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
No ill will towards the team, but isn’t it almost absurd that a CSS library is funded to the tune of 1m+ yearly and is still in financial difficulty? It is technically complete. There is no major research work or churn like in React, no monstruous complexity like Webpack.
What kind of headcount do you estimate $1MM/year can reliably support? That's like ~2 engineers at FAANG.
There are plenty of software firms out there (including the one I work for) whose entire budget is less than $1MM, and who have a headcount of developers that's more than 2.
Not every software company is busy writing software to target you with ads.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#165This is good, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Tailwind is out of the financial difficulty that we talked about yesterday. You can sponsor Tailwind for as little as $6,000/year. 29 companies were already sponsoring Tailwind including 16 companies at the $60,000/year level. Maybe Google AI Studio has decided to shell out a lot more, but it could also be a relatively small sponsorship compared to the $1.1M in spons…
No ill will towards the team, but isn’t it almost absurd that a CSS library is funded to the tune of 1m+ yearly and is still in financial difficulty? It is technically complete. There is no major research work or churn like in React, no monstruous complexity like Webpack.
money from sponsorships AND money from the PRO version. must be nice
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
No ill will towards the team, but isn’t it almost absurd that a CSS library is funded to the tune of 1m+ yearly and is still in financial difficulty? It is technically complete. There is no major research work or churn like in React, no monstruous complexity like Webpack.
What kind of headcount do you estimate $1MM/year can reliably support? That's like ~2 engineers at FAANG.
Tailwind is not a FAANG, they are glorified frontend CSS devs
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
No ill will towards the team, but isn’t it almost absurd that a CSS library is funded to the tune of 1m+ yearly and is still in financial difficulty? It is technically complete. There is no major research work or churn like in React, no monstruous complexity like Webpack.
100% agree. If an open source project needs money to run, then isn't that defeating the purpose of being open source? Open source is a gift economy. If the owner can monetise it on the side then that is just a bonus.
Open Source never was "a gift economy".
It is a sharing economy, and that requires mutual participation.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to be in Google's interest to keep Tailwind CSS afloat. Tailwind CSS is alive -> New / existing projects keep using Tailwind CSS -> more code for Gemini to train upon -> better and fancier UIs being created through Gemini -> popularity and usage of Gemini doesn't go down Of course this applies to any other LLM provider too but I guess Google saw this opportunity first.
I think it'd be better for AI and web dev if AIs generated real CSS instead. The supposed difficulty of tracking from elements to classes to rulesets is something that AIs can easily handle, and being able to change a ruleset once and have the update apply to all use sites is really good for AI-driven changes. Plus, humans and AIs won't have to wait for Tailwind to adopt new CSS features as they are added. If the AI…
There's nothing stopping you from requesting the AI write bare CSS. They're pretty decent at that too. And feed back screencaps, ask it to fix anything that's wrong, and five iterations later you have what you want. Just like a developer.
Bonus point: It'll appreciate one of those "CSS is awesome" mugs, too.
Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#169Re: Google AI Studio is now sponsoring Tailwind CSS
#170This is good, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Tailwind is out of the financial difficulty that we talked about yesterday. You can sponsor Tailwind for as little as $6,000/year. 29 companies were already sponsoring Tailwind including 16 companies at the $60,000/year level. Maybe Google AI Studio has decided to shell out a lot more, but it could also be a relatively small sponsorship compared to the $1.1M in spons…
No ill will towards the team, but isn’t it almost absurd that a CSS library is funded to the tune of 1m+ yearly and is still in financial difficulty? It is technically complete. There is no major research work or churn like in React, no monstruous complexity like Webpack.
I'd imagine that infrastructure costs are rather significant for Tailwind, and that there are non-neglibible organizational costs as well.