cloud fodder on Nostr: I've been fascinated by OpenSats for a while now. It's unlike any other software ...

I've been fascinated by OpenSats for a while now. It's unlike any other software grant org. It funds mostly "ideas", not foundational things. Is this because nostr has no foundation? It has no, long running projects or software?

The apache project, was bootstrapped from nothing with no funds, for 2 YEARS before the apache foundation was created to fund APACHE. Not to fund, whatever people's ideas were about apache and web serving.

Same for other free software foundations, there was always a central thing to fund, a single piece of software.

So anyway, that just means, OpenSats is the first non-profit of it's kind that I've seen, that is an incubator of *potential software. And to make matters more weird, it specifically will NOT fund projects that are long running..

If this plan had worked, nostr would not have churned it's entire user base multiple times, and yet, it feels like we're just starting out like it's 2023 again. This is largely in part to grants finally expiring, IMHO. So, we get to try again, and I'm here for it!

Decentralized funding (but NOT new non-profits), non-orgs, die-hard fans, internet-refugees, services that stubbornly refuse to die. That's what we have to bootstrap this next era of nostr.

SHOUTOUT to https://www.grantless.org/about vinney...axkl (npub19ma…axkl)

This ^^^ is gentlemen.

quoting
nevent1q…9prg

The nostr committee being anonymous is just wild to me. I would have liked to have any kind of feedback both during and after my grant period and also on my new proposal. For all I know, they just didn't know where to look for my non-github code, or were just lazy, or maybe just the proposal was shit. I'll never know.

Grant programs run in this fashion seem like they have hurt Nostr. Bad ideas get propped up (for YEARS), squashing good ideas, outfunding non-grant projects and crushing them with infrastructure that free-projects can't afford, muddling the priorities of a normal software cycle and motivations.. Users and usability deprioritized, basically just a license to do whatever you want.

But yeah, feedback, feedback, feedback. Not, ghosted by anon after putting in serious amounts of effort. If they need to be paid to take things more seriously and genuinely help grantees and potential candidates, then they should take a tiny fraction of this money they handle and use it on the board and committees. Tired of hearing they work for free and don't have time so just spend minimum effort on the whole thing. Basically that just means they get paid in other ways (influence) or they would not be doing it. Sus.