Very nice, they actually sponsor some really big things like EFF, Gnome. <a href="https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/companies-we-sponsor" rel="nofollow">https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/companies-we-spo...</a> . Thank you privateinternetaccess!
Wow, go PIA. I've been a member for years now with no problems (being able to select different locations helped a lot back in the day where League of Legends would actually give half the ping if I routed through Toronto). Their dedication to supporting OSS projects just reinforces my support.
Very good of PIA to sponsor this worthy project.<p>This episode, and previous ones with NumPy, Octave and other open-source projects have got me thinking: would it be worth adopting Swedish-style radical transparency and publishing a project's financial status and balance in a <i>standardized format</i>, so that it could become a standard item in a Github repo?<p>Too often projects die for lack of interest or slow down for lack of funding and it's not obvious because many people don't like asking for money, especially if making money isn't their primary goal. When they do run into a cash crunch, it's embarrassing for them and potential donors have to evaluate the project in the light of a financial failure rather than its best aspects, albeit a tiny failure of cash flow rather than the epic fails of overconfident commercial bets.<p>And there lies a secondary problem. Because many open source innovators aren't motivated by money, they often don't have a clear vision of how money could help them, and avoid dealing with it because the pursuit of it will take up too much of their head space and distract them from the artistic/ design/ development/ investigative/ scientific/ whatever work they are doing. There's tons of work being done without finance or monetization of any kind that could definitely benefit from both, but where the doers don't wish to be distracted by the questions that surround maximizing ROI.<p>Could a fully transparent non-profit or non-extractive funding model attract interest and participation from investors, patrons, and commercial sales people who understand and like financial infrastructure well enough to support the specialist producer rather than just maximizing short-term return - in other words, to share some of the structural benefits of working within a firm without the authoritarian and political pressures that normally accompany employment?
This is great to hear, glad to see good FOSS projects get the help they need. I only have a little bit of experience with Krita, but it's always been in my mind as a go-to if I ever need those tools.<p>It does seem a bit misleading, however, to not update the top bar to include the new funding (unless it just hasn't been updated yet). I know a lot of people will see the first blog post but not the second, and I hope the intention isn't to trick them into thinking they are still in a financial emergency (not that you shouldn't still donate)
This is great! I'm not a user but, with all this hubub I am feeling like I should try it over the weekend or lunch (I do abstract art). Everyone that seems to use the software has given glowing reviews.
Warning: conspiracy below<p>What's with PIA buying out IRC networks and 'donating'/funding so many OSS projects? It's weird. On freenode other VPN services have been banned. What's their goal with krita? PIA doesn't have FOSS. Why are they sponsoring so many FOSS projects?
You guys should use the business model that the makers of Sketch use (Bohemian Coding).<p>You pay a one-time fee $99 to download the app with all available features and new features for one year (365 days). After 365 days, when the Bohemian Coding team builds new features you have to pay $99 again to get those features... etcetera.<p>It's a great business model because you get the best of both worlds (one-time, and subscription model). This gives you capital to get started, and bootstraps your company as the software matures.