GUADEC/Gnome Fund Appeal

With the end of the year approaching, the Gnome Foundation has put together an appeal for help. You can also just head over to Gnome.org to contribute directly - and this year, they become a charity organization, meaning that contributions for US citizens will be tax deductions. Yay, tax deductions!

Comments

Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[phr2]

I thought GNOME was part of the GNU project. So isn't there already an FSF to handle the donation collecting end of things?

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[Anonymous Coward]

According to this:

The FSF promotes the development of free software -- particularly the GNU operating system and its GNU/Linux variants. The FSF helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of software freedom.

And when looking at the detail here here, it speaks nothing of FSF support. So I guess an uninformed guess would be "no, not for Gnome"

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, there's no FSF money for GNOME, and the underpant business isn't what it used to be either. Please help.

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[brad-x]

The non-free KDE? Did I miss a meeting?

I'm having a hard time believing people here either straight facedly make such commentary or do so of their own beliefs rather than parroting the party line.

Starting the GNOME project because QT didn't appeal to people's communist licensing views was socially and ideologically distorted to begin with, and the failure of the two projects to share ideas and work has been a detriment, not a service, to open source.

Please think before you adopt extremist attitudes.

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[Anonymous Coward]

oh and so you think that competition is BAD. You think that because they don't share ideas or work that it stiffles innovation. You think that having a choice is bad? That we should have one unified window enviroment, KDOME ? If you like KDE use it, if you like GNOME use it, if you like both use the parts you like. You have the choice, I don't see the problem.

It seems you have the extremist attitude, it seems you have the cummunist views.

ahh yes I see, you think that the bsd license is the right license so everything else must be communist.

You have no understanding whatsoever what open source is about. Ok sir what window manager can I use. thank you for making that decision for me.
stop posing and boot back into windows!

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[Dr. Evil]

You're calling somebody a communist and acusing them of being extremist in the same breath?

QT has the potential to make commercial development on Linux more restrictive than commercial development on Windows.

Yes, commercial interests don't have to use QT if they don't want to, and yes today it is only $2k per developer, and yes, you can develop GPL apps and make money off them... but

1. The QT commercial license can change
2. You don't have to use a GPL-ish license to develop free software under Windows, why should QT force you to do so under Linux?
3. Forking into a different toolkit for commercial development is a detriment to free software

So I guess if you really want, GTK can be used for:

• Apps with BSD and similar licenses
• Commercial internally developed applications for which funding would never be approved, and GPLing them would be out of the question
• Shareware

In short... anything which would not get commercial licensing and would not use a GPL-ish license.

There is a reason the LGPL exists. There is a reason why a library struggling for wide acceptance in Linux should not be using the GPL (or QPL for that matter) for distribution.

The only reasons to accept the restrictions of QT are 1. you con't care in the slightest about non GPL-ish development (even BSD-ish), or 2. you think that having a slick, easy to use, free library NOW is more important than anything else.

But for those two reasons, you might as well just develop under Windows. There are fewer restrictions.

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[brad-x]

Who said anything about BSD licenses? I think you're focusing on the wrong things here.

Don't try to troll me.

Re:Why is there a GNOME foundation?

[brad-x]

The only reasons to accept the restrictions of QT are 1. you con't care in the slightest about non GPL-ish development (even BSD-ish), or 2. you think that having a slick, easy to use, free library NOW is more important than anything else.

That sounds practical enough.

But for those two reasons, you might as well just develop under Windows. There are fewer restrictions.

I don't think that carries over quite as well; I use Unix based operating systems because they're of better workmanship overall and possess a greater amount of functionality which I like.

It is perhaps ironic that the GPL is more favorable to commercialization of a product than QT's licensing strategy is, isn't it? :P

Why not simply charge for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of giving the product away why not simply charge for it?

Re:Why not simply charge for it.

[Newcastle22]

Because its open source. Read Eric Raymond's book. Dan

Re:Why not simply charge for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I suggest these people get real jobs instead of living of the tax-payers.

They can write software in any way they want to but they should support themselves financially.

This is just wrong!

Re:Why not simply charge for it.

[frp001]

I suggest you just walk by... If you do not like the principle noone is forcing you to donate.
You may find it more normal to force licence fee down the users throats to pay for developer's meetings.
Besides every donator is not necessarily a US resident who will get tax reduction.

Re:Why not simply charge for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

"If you do not like the principle noone is forcing you to donate."

I don't have any problem with people donating money to whoever they want to but I do have a problem with there beeing tax deductions.

While I pay full tax other people can give money to this "charity" and less tax is payed by them, in the end meaning I pay a part for them to!

There should only be tax deductions for _real_ charity.

"You may find it more normal to force licence fee down the users throats to pay for developer's meetings."

No, but normally people should support themself economically, how they do that is up to themself. If they don't want to charge for their software they should work at mcDonalds or something instead, getting tax-money is not a god given right!

Re:Why not simply charge for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Except I probably have major problems with what you call "real charity" - ie: stuff the state should provide like healthcare, welfare etc

(IMNSHO this sort of charity demeans both the donor and the recipient)

redtux

sry...

[Anonymous Coward]

I use blackbox ;-)

Nah seriously, the climate is hard for all of us.
I kinda think of what Linux Torvalds wrote in his book: "If you cannot be sucessful by building great products, then you shouldn't be".

That's Evolution & Darwin to you.

I donate used clothes to the salvation army for

[eclectro]

a tax deduction. Maybe the Gnome Foundation can use some old underwear????

Re:I donate used clothes to the salvation army for

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps it wouzld be better to donate to KDE e.V or directly to your preferred project. Like abiword, quanta and so on.

Re:I donate used clothes to the salvation army for

[eclectro]

exactly!!! The "underwear gnomes" of southpark fame. I was wondering when somebody would catch my volley.

A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

and this year, they become a charity organization, meaning that contributions for US citizens will be tax deductions.

When I think of all of the worthy charities that help the less-fortunate, the idea of a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers taking advantage of our tax code like this is revolting.

The announcement that Gnome is now a recognized, tax-deductible charity is not my idea of a real uplifting message right before the holidays.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

hey those Danm bums can get jobs, Like me. Now if you don't like givin' open source programers a bit of cash and gettin' a tax deduction then don't do it. But I feel that they are a valid charity because they previded a free public service with-out goverment funding or ADs. The other thing is I don't if they will get any money for themselfs but use most of it on more testing hardware and meeting in meat space.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm more general than that. I question why so-called "donations" are tax-deductible in the first place. Is it really necessary to bring out the "good heart" in people?

A True Donation is done without any expectation of returns or getting anything back. You give and let go, knowing there is more where that came from.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Now if you don't like givin' open source programers a bit of cash and gettin' a tax deduction then don't do it.

I won't.

But I feel that they are a valid charity because they previded a free public service with-out goverment funding or ADs.

When the government grants tax-deductible status, that is government funding. If you are in the 30% tax bracket, 30% of "your" donation came from the government.

But that is simply not the point. There are charities to help homeless people, cancer victims, orphans, and third-world famine victims -- just to name a few causes. That's a whole lot more worthwhile than sending money to people who are getting their jollies by coding a GUI.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

When I think of all the hundreds of thousands of people who benefit the hard work donated by open-source developers, the idea of a self-righteous liberal prig complaining about leveraging the tax code as it was intended is revolting.

The idea that there are people out there who think only their pet projects deserve assistance is not my idea of a real uplifting message right before Christmas. (And if you object to my calling it Christmas, go to work that day and take your religious holiday off instead.)

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Znork]

Why? By what criteria? Help a cancer victim and they'll die eventually anyway, help a famine victim and they might last until the next famine... but help get free code created and it has the capacity to last and help unlimited numbers of people for a long time. Help develop software that can spare the governments in the third world from spending money on proprietary software and they'll have more money over to spend on fighting famine. Help develop an equal playing field in the IT industry and developing countries will have a chance to create an indigenous industry without paying IP taxes to the rich world.

Worthwhile depends on your point of view. You may get a warm fuzzy feeling from helping someone more directly. If you do, I suggest you work at a homeless shelter or some similar charity, where you can see and touch the people you help.

Me, I prefer being charitable for more longrange goals. In the long run I regard it as more worthwhile.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

"a whole lot more worthwhile than sending money to people who are getting their jollies by coding a GUI"

Don't support GNOME. Then you can be assured that some portion of your donation will go to people who get their jollies by figuring out ways to violate anti-trust laws with impunity.

What...you think those charities don't use computers? You think those charities use computers that are immune to MS?

Get real! Those charities are using commodity computers! And if those GUI coders aren't able to get their jollies coding for the public good then those worthwhile charities will be forced into audits and License 6.0!

Follow the money and think things through.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

When I think of all the hundreds of thousands of people who benefit the hard work donated by open-source developers

Who cares? Lots of people benefit from the work of Intel and AMD, too, but it doesn't mean that they are morally entitled to tax-deductible contributions.

...a self-righteous liberal prig complaining about leveraging the tax code as it was intended is revolting.

It's easy to be self-righteous when you are right. But that's a feeling that you are unlikely to enjoy any time soon. Oh, and I'm damned proud to be a liberal -- thanks for noticing.

As to your name calling, I'll respond in kind:

I don't give a damn about what some right-wing, borrow-and-spend, self-centered, pompous ass like you has to say about charities and the tax code. Your kind lacks the moral compass to make that sort of judgement.

The idea that there are people out there who think only their pet projects deserve assistance is not my idea of a real uplifting message right before Christmas.

You lack the ability to differentiate between a deserving charity and a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers. I do not. I don't need to assume that every organization from the Ku Klux Klan to Habitat for Humanity is equally deserving. I can look at what the organizations do to determine which ones are more deserving.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Timesprout]

I would certainly agree with these sentiments, particularly given the timing of the announcement when its traditional to support proper charities assisting those less fortunate than ourselves.

What I find particularly annoying about this is the fact that several for profit companies are leveraging the gnome codebase in their commercial offerings. An oft repated mantra on this site is that its a labour of love for developers to work on OS projects, apparently this is not the case with gnome. If the gnome project wants to be taken seriously then surely they must prove that they are at least capable of self sufficiency, rather then relying on dodgy requests for hand outs.

I'll be making my donations to the staving, homeless and suffering this christmas.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Diabolical]

When I think of all of the worthy charities that help the less-fortunate, the idea of a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers taking advantage of our tax code like this is revolting.

And the very idea of having your tax money being used to wage war against a very poor country isn't?

I know i'd rather spend it on helping GNOME.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[zombiepopper]

Gnome isn't a "charity" but a tax-exempt, non-profit organization. This is right from gnome.org:

GNOME Foundation is a tax-exempt, non-profit 501(c)(3) organization and all donations are tax-deductible in the USA

There are plenty of other organizations that have the same status that are surely more disturbing than a group dedicated to working on such a high quality (free) project as Gnome.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[JamesHenstridge]

I probably wouldn't call the GNOME Foundation as a charity either. However, it is a non profit organisation as recognised by US law (I suppose charities are a subset of non-profits).

If you would prefer to give your spare income to another charity/non-profit, that is your choice. We are being upfront about what the money will be used for.

If you feel that a donation to the GNOME foundation does not deserve a tax deduction (ie. you would prefer to pay tax on the contribution), feel free to not declare the donation.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

By what criteria?

By my criteria.

Help a cancer victim and they'll die eventually anyway, help a famine victim and they might last until the next famine...

Reducing human suffering is more important than writing GUIs. I guess your point is that you'd rather see people suffer and die than have to use Gnome in its current state -- which it got to with no tax-deductible donations.

Help develop software that can spare the governments in the third world from spending money on proprietary software and they'll have more money over to spend on fighting famine.

The amount of money spent by third-world countries on software is insignificant compared to the cost of fighting famine, river blindness, AIDS, cancer, etc. If they got all of their computers for free, it would make little difference. The amount of money that, say, Sudan could save by using free software would make no significant difference to lives of the people of that country. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Besides, there is already viable, free software. I don't think that an even more polished version of Gnome is what will cure the AIDS epidemic in sub-saharan Africa.

Me, I prefer being charitable for more longrange goals.

Are you sure that you don't just prefer charities that create software that you personally benefit from?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

What do tax deductions to charitable organizations have to do with profitable corporations? What corporations benefit from supporting a Gnome conference? Is Sun getting a free display at the conference? HP? IBM? Who?

No one. Your reference to AMD and Intel is nothing but a red herring intended to inflame anyone with an anti-corporate axe to grind.

It's easy to be self-righteous when you're self-deluded into thinking your way is the only way. Fortunately for the rest of society, other viewpoints are not only allowed, but encouraged and even supported by the openness of the tax laws.

Somewhere you seem to have gotten the idea that "charity" means "socially responsible." Charity is just giving to help when you aren't required to and don't expect a direct benefit back. Your "morales" are irrelevant.

BTW, if you were offended by the "name calling", reread your own post -- I just parodied your own statement from the flip side.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

I guess your point is that you'd rather see people suffer and die...

I have to admit, you are a master at inflammatory red-herring arguments that don't answer people's comments.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[spakka]

Why are you so bitter? Did they reject a patch from you or something?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

If you feel that a donation to the GNOME foundation does not deserve a tax deduction (ie. you would prefer to pay tax on the contribution), feel free to not declare the donation.

You misunderstand my objection. I don't want anyone to be able to take a tax deduction for giving to Gnome. It diverts money away from worthy charities.

Helping to develop a product that big businesses (Sun, RedHat, etc.) will sell for a profit is not what tax deductions should be for.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

He commented that helping cancer and famine victims was not as worthwhile as helping Gnome because those people would probably die anyway. I directly addressed that argument, so quite accusing me of being inflammatory or creating red-herring arguments.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[spakka]

I don't want anyone to be able to take a tax deduction for giving to Gnome. It diverts money away from worthy charities.

By what mechanism? Do you assume that anyone who donates to Gnome would otherwise have donated an equal amount to one of your worthy charities? Or do you think that the tax deductions themselves are somehow funded by these charities?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

Your comment about "suffer and die" is inflammatory. The poster made the valid observation that many charities don't have a long-term benefit -- they just tide people over so they can suffer a little longer.

Education and skills are more valuable in the long run than a soup-kitchen approach to helping people. Teach them to support themselves and they don't need your help anymore.

Helping third-world nations avoid spending their meager finances on corporations software is a good thing for the world society.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[JamesHenstridge]

If you think the main reason most people work on GNOME is to help big business, then you are mistaken. It certainly hasn't been the motivation for my contributions, which started before Sun started working on GNOME, and before any Linux distro was including GNOME (let alone as its default desktop).

On the subject of tax deductability, the GNOME Foundation meets the criteria for section 501(c)(3) (the foundation's work is of public benefit). If you don't feel that it should have tax exempt status, then you should campaign against the law.

You make it sound like the foundation is trying to trick people in to donating. We are being quite open about what the money will be used for, so each person who considers donating can make an informed choice.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

The advancement of technology helps society. Charity to poor trash is merely a waste of resources designed to make the giver feel good.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Your comment about "suffer and die" is inflammatory.

No, it is not. The other poster is the one that brought up cancer and famine victims dying anyway even if they received assistance.

The poster made the valid observation that many charities don't have a long-term benefit -- they just tide people over so they can suffer a little longer.

So would you rather die from pancreatic cancer in horrible agony, or would you rather that a charitable organization provided you with morphine to ease your pain?

Helping third-world nations avoid spending their meager finances on corporations software is a good thing for the world society.

There is already free software available. It was developed without the benefit of tax-deductible contributions. It is already good enough. A better version of Gnome is simply unimportant in this context.

Please, tell me what improvements are needed to Gnome before it is good enough to serve the needs of a third-world government.

Want to help third-world countries? Then develop text-based software that will run on 80386-based PCs with 1MB of RAM and a 120MB hard disk. Don't try to convince me that using tax dollars to help develop something that Sun will bundle with Solaris on high-end workstations is going to help third-world countries.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

On the subject of tax deductability, the GNOME Foundation meets the criteria for section 501(c)(3) (the foundation's work is of public benefit).

You and I both know that organizations like Gnome were not what legislators had in mind when they drafted 501(c)(3). It reminds me of the people that put a port-a-potty on their boat so that they can claim the boat as a residence. There is a difference between ethical and legal.

If you don't feel that it should have tax exempt status, then you should campaign against the law.

Yes, I probably should.

You make it sound like the foundation is trying to trick people in to donating.

I never meant to imply that. What I believe is that the tax-deductible status will cause some people to donate to Gnome rather than to humanitarian causes.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

You and I both know that organizations like Gnome were not what legislators had in mind when they drafted 501(c)(3).

Bullshit. It was intended to support non-profit organizations, and it's doing that. The fact that you don't agree with the goals of at least one of those organizations does not make the law or it's intent any less valid.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[MechCow]

The idea that there are people out there who think only their pet projects deserve assistance is not my idea of a real uplifting message right before Christmas.

I can't speak for the original poster but when I read "charities that help the less fortunate" I was thinking of things other than people's pet projects. That is the whole point, that there are organisations trying to reverse social evils like homelessness and drug addiction, and perhaps projects like Gnome do not deserve the same tax previlidges because generally speaking, even after the release of Gnome 2.0 the homeless are still, largely, without homes (although having a great free GUI is extremely generous - and we can only hope that as soon as they get homes they will take advantage of this).

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Do you assume that anyone who donates to Gnome would otherwise have donated an equal amount to one of your worthy charities?

I assume that some people would have. If someone donates $100 to Gnome, that's $100 less that they have to donate to other organizations.

Or do you think that the tax deductions themselves are somehow funded by these charities?

What? That's a new one on me.

The tax deduction that you get for donating to Gnome (hypothetically speaking) would be funded by every other taxpayer in the U.S. It is the American taxpayers that fund the deductions. If you get a deduction, the rest of us have to make up for it.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

And the very idea of having your tax money being used to wage war against a very poor country isn't?

That depends. Is the country in question poor because it denies such basic human rights as freedom of speech, freedom of and from religion, equality of opportunity for all regardless of race, creed, and/or sex?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you for real you freaking maniac?!

What is wrong with you? Do you honestly think it's even remotely ok that a bunch of hippies can sit and play around at the governments expense (that means everyones expense) instead of getting real jobs like everyone else?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

So would you rather die from pancreatic cancer in horrible agony, or would you rather that a charitable organization provided you with morphine to ease your pain?

Having watched my grandfather suffer from pancreatic cancer for almost a year (though the doctors originally gave him 3 months at the outside), I'd be far more inclined to self-terminate than expect society to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of treatment and pain killers so I could selfishly cling to life for a couple more agonized months.

Please, tell me what improvements are needed to Gnome before it is good enough to serve the needs of a third-world government.

How about you tell me what features are being worked on that they don't need? Gnome is solid and relatively stable, but it is not "complete." It needs better documentation, better integration (e.g. file extension/application binding defaults), and most of the sub-projects are still far from completely functional.

What would be the point of "developing" text-based software for 386-based PCs? The machines being donated by corps to the third world are typically Pentium or PII systems they'd been using until a year or two ago. Those shipped by my current client site were PII350s with 256MB RAM, 10G HDDs, 1280x1024 capable displays, with 10baseT ethernet, SB16 compatible sound support, mouse, keyboard, and monitor. The cheap PCs sold in India for those with a limited budget are even more powerful than that.

Asking anyone in the third world to try to educate themselves using 386 based machines as you describe would be futile -- the skills required would be hopelessly outdated before they even turned the machine on. They don't need to learn how to type -- they need to be able to replace modern commercial products that leech their budgets.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Newcastle22]

Who cares? Lots of people benefit from the work of Intel and AMD, too, but it doesn't mean that they are morally entitled to tax-deductible contributions.

Intel and AMD don't give their product and source code away for FREE.

You lack the ability to differentiate between a deserving charity and a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers. I do not. I don't need to assume that every organization from the Ku Klux Klan to Habitat for Humanity is equally deserving. I can look at what the organizations do to determine which ones are more deserving.

You lack the understanding of what this particular charity does. Gnome is an open source GUI for Linux, which makes Linux easier to use, which creates more Linux users, which helps to further the technology of humankind without secluding that technology from the masses. All for free. Gnome is a whole lot more than just "a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers." In addition, it is a technology that helps improve the technology (Linux) that the internet is reliant upon by attracting users to Linux and making it easier to use. If you don't know what Open Source is, I suggest you read Eric Raymond's book before you go denouncing Open Source organizations as charities.

If you don't want to donate to Gnome, by all means donate to what ever charity you find worthy. But don't call Gnome an undeserving charity just because it doesn't feed starving children in Africa.

Dan

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

What do tax deductions to charitable organizations have to do with profitable corporations?

In this case, the tax-deductible contributions are funding the development of a product that is sold by Sun, RedHat, and others.

What corporations benefit from supporting a Gnome conference? Is Sun getting a free display at the conference? HP? IBM? Who?

Every corporation who sells Gnome as part of a package. Every corporation that uses Gnome benefits from the further development.

No one.

Wrong. See the above.

BTW, if you were offended by the "name calling", reread your own post -- I just parodied your own statement from the flip side.

I did reread my post (at your suggestion). What I found was "self-indulgent computer programmers." "Self-indulgent" is not a horrible insult. It simply means "indulging one's appetites, desires, etc., freely."

You, on the other hand, felt the need to refer to me as a "self-righteous liberal prig". There is no way that "self-righteous" or "prig" could be considered anything other than insulting and excessively so, at that. Liberal? Well, I'm happy with that, though I'm sure that you meant it in an insulting manner.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

Funny -- I felt every bit as offended at your "self-indulgent" comment. I take pride in my code, make a good living with it, and hardly feel "indulgent" when I contribute to the community through code or testing.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Newcastle22]

Who cares? Lots of people benefit from the work of Intel and AMD, too, but it doesn't mean that they are morally entitled to tax-deductible contributions.

Intel and AMD don't give their product and source code away for FREE.

You lack the ability to differentiate between a deserving charity and a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers. I do not. I don't need to assume that every organization from the Ku Klux Klan to Habitat for Humanity is equally deserving. I can look at what the organizations do to determine which ones are more deserving.

You lack the understanding of what this particular charity does. Gnome is an open source GUI for Linux, which makes Linux easier to use, which creates more Linux users, which helps to further the technology of humankind without secluding that technology from the masses. All for free. Gnome is a whole lot more than just "a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers." In addition, it is a technology that helps improve the technology (Linux) that the internet is reliant upon by attracting users to Linux and making it easier to use. If you don't know what Open Source is, I suggest you read Eric Raymond's book before you go denouncing Open Source organizations as charities.

If you don't want to donate to Gnome, by all means donate to what ever charity you find worthy of your hard earned money. But don't call Gnome undeserving of being a charity just because it doesn't feed starving children in Africa.

Dan

Re:A Charity Organization?

[spakka]

If someone donates $100 to Gnome, that's $100 less that they have to donate to other organizations.

Or $100 less to spend on drugs and prostitutes. Do any evidence, other than your imagined special insight into the motives of others, to support your rather strong claim that giving to Gnome 'diverts money away from worthy charities'.

If you get a deduction, the rest of us have to make up for it.

Nonsense. I'm willing to bet that your tax bill is calculated on your own income, just like everyone elses.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

1. I am for real.
2. I've been called worse than maniac -- no one has ever accused me of being sane. *g*
3. Read the original story -- the donations are to support the conference, not the developers. The developers do the work for free or are sponsored the companies they work for. Whatever gave you the idea that the Gnome (or any open source) developers don't have "real jobs"?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

For *Linux*? Hmm..

Creates Linux users?

And here was me thinking it was people that created people...

I'd hardly call the Internet "reliant upon" Linux. And it's certainly not reliant upon GNOME. Not to mention that attracting more workstation users of Linux - or any of the other platforms that GNOME can run on that you are either ignorant of or just plain ignored - helps the internet in any way.

I'm afraid that GNOME is by any serious moral standard completely undeserving of being a charity. Your ignorant and illogical argument does not change that one jot.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

You lack the understanding of what this particular charity does.

I fully understand what it does.

Gnome is an open source GUI for Linux

Is that what's on that Mandrake system over in the corner of my office? Don't talk down to me.

which helps to further the technology of humankind without secluding that technology from the masses.

Please! Now you are just getting grandiose. The primary beneficiaries of the Gnome foundation's work are companies that sell products that incorporate Gnome and rich kids who like to play with it. Most computers in third-world countries are hard-pressed to run Windows 3.1, much less a GUI like Gnome.

If you don't know what Open Source is, I suggest you read Eric Raymond's book [amazon.com] before you go denouncing Open Source organizations as charities.

I was releasing open source software in the early 1980s, so don't lecture me.

But don't call Gnome an undeserving charity just because it doesn't feed starving children in Africa.

Why? I judge how deserving a charity is by how much they improve the lives of those they purport to help and by how much those people needed help. Curing river blindness or fighting famine seems a lot more important than making Gnome into an even nicer GUI.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn straight.

Just wanted to say I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Or $100 less to spend on drugs and prostitutes.

Generally, the kind of people that spend money on drugs and prostitutes are not big donors to charity.

Do any evidence, other than your imagined special insight into the motives of others, to support your rather strong claim that giving to Gnome 'diverts money away from worthy charities'.

My insight is not imagined. I've worked with non-profits and know the psychology and practices of the donors.

Nonsense. I'm willing to bet that your tax bill is calculated on your own income, just like everyone elses.

So you believe that the tax rates are not, in any way, influenced by deductions? You think that every person in the U.S. could double their deductions and the tax rates would not go up? Economics wasn't very big in your school, was it?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Newcastle22]

Reducing human suffering is more important than writing GUIs.

That may be true, but that is not the issue here. The issue is whether or not Gnome is deserving of being catagorized by the U.S. government as a charity. Comparing it to other charities on grounds of 'which is more deserving' is purely subjective. The service that Gnome provides to the world as a whole for no cost is an important one, and the fact that the software and source code is given away for free, combined with the fact that it is probably the most popular Linux GUI, makes it a valid charity. Please read on for why I think this way...

The amount of money spent by third-world countries on software is insignificant compared to the cost of fighting famine, river blindness, AIDS, cancer, etc. If they got all of their computers for free, it would make little difference. The amount of money that, say, Sudan could save by using free software would make no significant difference to lives of the people of that country. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

I would like to see how you came up with this "fact". If the Sudan government could put Linux on every one of its computers, that would save them about $200 per computer, depending on what MS OS they might use. That adds up just as quickly as small $20 donations from generous souls like yourself. I am no anthropolgist, but I am willing to bet that EVERY charity, research clinic, and government agency that is "deserving" in your view uses computers and technology to help those who suffer. If they do not have computers (complete with software to make those computers useful), that is the first thing their budget should call for. Do not underestimate the need for technology, for it is the strongest answer to these terrible problems that you mention.

Gnome helps technology proliferate throughout the entire world and for no cost. To me, in this day and age where technoligcally advanced societies proliferate, that is a worthy cause.

Dan

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

The advancement of technology helps society.

Not very much. How much better off is society since Mozilla 1.2 came out than back when they ran Netscape 4.7? How much better off is society with Office XP than they were with Office 95? How much better off is society with the 2.4 Linux kernel than they were with the 2.0 Linux kernel? Please, quantify it.

Charity to poor trash is merely a waste of resources designed to make the giver feel good.

If you have money, then you are living proof that you can be "trash" without being poor.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Nodatadj]

Or is it poor because the country thats about to wage war on it has had an embargo on it for years...

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Newcastle22]

Please! Now you are just getting grandiose. The primary beneficiaries of the Gnome foundation's work are companies that sell products that incorporate Gnome and rich kids who like to play with it. Most computers in third-world countries are hard-pressed to run Windows 3.1, much less a GUI like Gnome.I assume you visit many third world countries or you wouldn't be making this statement? If so, I cannot argue because I haven't been. Well, maybe Gnome is premature as a charity. Once third world countries have computers that can run it, I'll donate to Gnome.

Dan

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

What would be the point of "developing" text-based software for 386-based PCs? The machines being donated by corps to the third world are typically Pentium or PII systems they'd been using until a year or two ago.

Because that is not what the majority of machines in the third world are.

Asking anyone in the third world to try to educate themselves using 386 based machines as you describe would be futile -- the skills required would be hopelessly outdated before they even turned the machine on.

PCs in third world countries are used to do work in government offices, not educate people in villages without electricity. 99.9% of people in third world countries have never even touched a computer and the vast majority of them will die without ever using one.

I just checked with a bunch of third world countries. It turns out that they would benefit more from food, medicine, and education than from a better version of Gnome.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you SERIOUS? You would equate buggy software with HUMAN SUFFERING?

What kind of person are you? This is utterly vile.

Will GNOME help a terminal cancer patient? No.
Will GNOME help find a cure for AIDS? No.
Will GNOME help to feed the third world? No.

But hey! At least 3rd world peasants can run stupid applets on their panel, right! That is, if they ever get access to a computer, which isn't likely anyway because they're too busy TRYING TO FIND THEIR NEXT MEAL.

So pray, tell me how donating to GNOME a more worthy "long range goal" then donating to the cancer society?

And what kind of idiots modded this guy up to 4?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

I assume you visit many third world countries or you wouldn't be making this statement?

No, but I have helped someone who was trying to bring computers to third-world villages. It didn't happen because it was just not feasible.

Once third world countries have computers that can run it, I'll donate to Gnome.

I have a better idea: Donate to organizations fighting AIDS in Africa. Or send money to the Carter Center to help with their efforts to combat river blindness.

Don't get me wrong. I love computers. I have six of them in my office. But I don't think that they are going to solve the problems of the third world.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

I would like to see how you came up with this "fact".

I made it up. Actually, I considered what I have read about the government of Sudan and their finances and realized a couple of things:

1. Their government is very small relative to the number of people in the country.
2. Computers are rare even in their government offices.

If the Sudan government could put Linux on every one of its computers, that would save them about $200 per computer, depending on what MS OS they might use.

They can already. Mandrake, for instance, is ready to go. That is, providing they have the hardware to support it. Many of their computers are not nearly that modern, though.

That adds up just as quickly as small $20 donations from generous souls like yourself.

It doesn't really because most third-world countries have so few computers relative to the number of citizens.

Plus, what we are talking about here is improvements to an already polished GUI. How many changes are necessary before you believe that it is usable? I thought it was pretty darned good already. Not only that, how much will the donations stimulate the development?

Re:A Charity Organization?

[pzilla]

You see, I think Hemos made a mistake calling it "Charity". It is not. You can't compare it with donating money to orphans or cancer victims. But if you use Gnome application you could donate if you like it. Think of it like a compensation for you using something nice and showing them your appreciation.

You already pay for software. And you could be paying a lot more if you were using only closed source. At least, in this case, you don't get a bill and you pay if you want.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Bullshit. It was intended to support non-profit organizations, and it's doing that.

No, it's intended to support certain types of non-profit organizations. From the IRS web pages:

The exempt purposes set forth inIRC Section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erection or maintenance of public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening of neighborhood tensions; elimination of prejudice and discrimination; defense of human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.

I find it hard to see how the development of a snazzy computer interface falls into the intent of the law.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[spakka]

Your various claims in this thread depend heavily on some supposed special insight into the minds of others, for example

charitable donors:

My insight is not imagined. I've worked with non-profits and know the psychology and practices of the donors.

'self-indulgent' Gnome coders:

They do it for personal fulfillment.

other posters:

Your kind lacks the moral compass to make that sort of judgement.

legislators:

You and I both know that organizations like Gnome were not what legislators had in mind when they drafted 501(c)(3).

and so on. The universally negative responses you have elicited in this thread demonstrate that you have no such insight.

So you believe that the tax rates are not, in any way, influenced by deductions? You think that every person in the U.S. could double their deductions and the tax rates would not go up?

Strawman. The actual claim I refuted was:

If you get a deduction, the rest of us have to make up for it.

which remains false.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

But if you use Gnome application you could donate if you like it. Think of it like a compensation for you using something nice and showing them your appreciation.

I already do that for lots of software. What I object to is the tax-deductible nature of the donation to Gnome.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't beleive what I just read! Do you even beleive yourself? What kind of demented people moderated the parent post up while moderating the thread-start post down?

Do you REALLY think a bunch of coders writing a desktop mostly because it's fun is a charity? Really?

Give me a f*cking break!

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're talking about Iraq, not Afghanistan. Still, the game can be played...

Or is it poor because it's leader funnels all it's revenues into palaces and weapons instead of feeding and educating his people.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you are legally able to take advantage of that law but it's highly unethical to say the least!

You use a law aimed at reliving _charities_ from taxes (technically the people donating) so that they can help the poor even more while the government basically pays 30% of it (since they don't get that tax).

The fact that the gnome foundation takes advantage of that law to write a GUI that is even sold by corporations is just disgusting.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Nonsense. I'm willing to bet that your tax bill is calculated on your own income, just like everyone elses."

Of cause everyones tax is calculated on his or her own income but thats not the issue. The issue is that tax is NOT payed by you (the 30%). Thats means that everyone else has to pay more tax (raising tax percentage) to make up for that loss.

That can be ok if the money is really donated to real charities but not if it's paid out to a hord of programmers doing desktop software.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[pzilla]

I already do that for lots of software. What I object to is the tax-deductible nature of the donation to Gnome.

They chose to go that way because it helps getting more people to donate. *Tax Deductable* can be a good incentive.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

"If you get a deduction, the rest of us have to make up for it.

which remains false."

? It's not false, if people make deductions the tax percentage raises.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Your various claims in this thread depend heavily on some supposed special insight into the minds of others

That's why I enjoy being insightful.

The universally negative responses you have elicited in this thread demonstrate that you have no such insight.

Now you are simply lying. There have been messages strongly in support of what I wrote. For example:

Damn straight.

Just wanted to say I agree with you wholeheartedly.

My posts have received both positive and negative moderation.

You also ignore the audience. If I got on an NRA-run web site and said that most Americans were in favor of some form of gun control, I would receive almost universally negative replies. But that would not mean that what I said was untrue.

Strawman. The actual claim I refuted was:

If you get a deduction, the rest of us have to make up for it.

which remains false.

The argument was not a strawman argument. Nor was my contention false. Who do you think pays for deductions? All taxpayers do. Just because it does not happen the same year that you take the deduction does not mean it doesn't happen. Do you think that you can take a $100 deduction and the Federal government just prints another $100 to make up for it? No. The $100 is made up by all of the other taxpayers.

Maybe it's the numbers being too big that is confusing you. Try this:

1. Island with three people.
   
2. Plane delivers goods once a month.
   
3. Pilot charges $300.
   
4. Government on island taxes everyone $100 each to pay for plane.
   
5. You take a deduction that knocks $50 off of your taxes.
   
6. Plane comes. Government has $250. Pilot wants $300.
   
7. Government borrows $50 from other island
   
8. Now government needs $50 + $10 interest($60)
   
9. Government raises everyone's taxes by $20 the next year to pay for your deduction.
   

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

They chose to go that way because it helps getting more people to donate. *Tax Deductable* can be a good incentive.

Yes, but it's an incentive that I feel should be reserved for humanitarian efforts and things that are simply more important than improvements to a GUI for Linux. I don't think that we should be elevating Gnome to the same stature as charities the feed the homeless and those that work to cure tropical diseases (for example).

Re:A Charity Organization?

[pzilla]

I don't think that we should be elevating Gnome to the same stature as charities the feed the homeless and those that work to cure tropical diseases (for example).

I think this is up to people to choose. They choose who deserve their money. BTW most people don't know what gnome is and a few donations by linux geeks won't change the amount that goes to real charity. What is import here is that taxes don't get on the way of "charity money".

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Why? By what criteria? Help a cancer victim and they'll die eventually anyway, help a famine victim and they might last until the next famine.

My God! You make me ashamed to be a geek. Get some priorities!

We all die eventually, but many cancers are curable and the agony of starvation can be relieved given the necessary political will (although there only seems to be a will for war and destruction right now).

It's about aleviating peoples suffering. What don't you get about this idea? It's a much bigger and more important idea that free software IMO.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Moloch666]

I think from this thread you have learned that "putting down" anything in open source will give you a Troll moderation. Gnome is great and all even if the Nautilus crashes on startup on my FreeBSD box (I'm sure I did something wrong somewhere...). You just need to admit that 15 years from now South Africa will thank Americans for Donating to Gnome desktop which saved them 20 upgrades to Windows 2017 Platnium XP Super.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Moloch666]

Hopefully money isn't going to buying painkillers but a method to make the cancer go away. That would be worth more than making Gnome better.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[JohnFluxx]

It's all a question of scale.
How much better off is society if one person lives another few years instead of dying? How much better is the human race if some small village in south africa doesn't get wiped out due to some disease? And so on.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Eccles]

So would you rather die from pancreatic cancer in horrible agony, or would you rather that a charitable organization provided you with morphine to ease your pain?

Why is this an either/or?

Unless you give *all* of your money beyond subsistence level to charities, giving money to Gnome that will benefit both oneself and others is something to view on its own merits.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

Did you read what you posted? The key relevant items expressly listed as qualifying include:

• advancement of education or science
• lessening the burdens of government

Re:A Charity Organization?

[aWalrus]

You know, you miss the point in so many levels, it is hard to adress it, really.

I am Mexican. Mexico is a developing 3rd world country, and a lot of the more promising government projects are software industry development based, like this Project to give a boost to multimedia and animation industry in Jalisco (spanish only, sorry). Just what do you think we are? a bunch of freaking retards? There IS industry and education in here! It's not all about helping out the extremely poor, it's about helping society and industry develop so there is more cash flow, education and yes, more programs to help those in need. That said, open source initiatives DO help. A lot. And a bunch of the people involved in open source projects are from third world countries (incidentally, Miguel de Icaza is Mexican).

Please note, too, that foreign backing is not all there is to charity. A country has to develop its own strenghts and help itself. I think we're on our way there. Politics and economic situations are a complicated thing, and broad statements like the ones you make are usually off the mark.
--

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Help a cancer victim and they'll die eventually anyway [...] Help develop software that can spare the governments in the third world from spending money on proprietary software

Eh, why bother? Governments will fall eventually, anyway.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

I am Mexican. Mexico is a developing 3rd world country

I have visited Mexico on several occasions and while there are desparately poor regions, overall Mexico is probably better described as a 2nd world country.

Just what do you think we are? a bunch of freaking retards?

Not at all. Nor was I truly addressing the issues of developing countries with real economies. I was more thinking about true, destitute, no-food, no-potable-water, no-healthcare, millions-dying-of famine and disease, etc. third-world countries like Sudan.

Donations of computer hardware and software to projects like the one that you mentioned should be tax-deductible. I am completely in favor of that. But the Gnome foundation is simply too-far-removed from that scenario for me to be comfortable. Think about it: they want donations so that they can fund conferences and other peripheral activities associated with enhancing Gnome. What does that really translate to in aid to the less-fortunate and to developing countries? It's not like they are developing software to help farmers with crop rotation, or to provide medical information as an expert system in remote regions. It's a highly-polished GUI and I find it unlikely that further tax-subsidized tweaking will make a lot of difference to third-world countries. It is also a lot different that a project to teach computer skills and build an industry in a developing country.

I really don't think that, idealogically, we are that far apart.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

Did you read what you posted? The key relevant items expressly listed as qualifying include:

* advancement of education or science
* lessening the burdens of government

I expected that reply, but I do not believe that further enhancements to Gnome significantly advance education, science, or lessens the burdens of government in any real way.

Since I've had some sleep and am feeling a bit more coherent, I ask that you please hear me out. Linux is available and viable as an OS already. There are articles on Slashdot every week proudly proclaiming that various governments and private corporations are switching to Linux. Were we talking about a situation where Linux was not a viable alternative for pricey commercial software, then I would feel differently about this. But right now, Gnome is simply one of many Linux add-ons and it already works very well. I can't see where enhancements to it will make much difference to those countries and individuals that have a real need for charitable contributions.

As I said in another posting, the money is so far removed from those needing the charity that I'm having trouble with it. We are talking about charitable donations to fund peripheral activities associated with volunteer development and enhancement of a Linux GUI that some third world country might choose to use. That just doesn't stack up next to paying for antibiotics to fight river blindness or the distribution of condoms in AIDS-ravaged countries.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[fmaxwell]

I think this is up to people to choose. They choose who deserve their money.

And I'm all in favor of that. I fully support your right to give your money to any organization that you want. If you want to donate to Gnome, go for it. If you would prefer to donate to The Salvation Army, that's fine too. You can even donate to the American Nazi Party.

What I object to is the government subsidizing of the donation to Gnome with a tax deduction. While I think that it is wonderful when a charity that directly helps the needy gets that status, I do not feel that Gnome's work rises to that level.

BTW most people don't know what gnome is and a few donations by linux geeks won't change the amount that goes to real charity.

You are probably right.

P.S. I am sorry that you felt the need to mark me as a Slashdot foe because of our difference of opinions. Hopefully, rational discussion of our disagreement will change your mind.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[msobkow]

I was more thinking about true, destitute, no-food, no-potable-water, no-healthcare...

Sounds like you are describing a part of the world unfit to support humans. When such areas are overpopulated and deal with famines as a result, I have a real hard time feeling much pity.

When there is no way to survive where you are, you move. Expecting others to pay to make the area livable is ridiculous.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Michael Wardle]

The US theory is that programs of social benefit (education, welfare, etc.) should be paid by individuals rather than the state. If individuals give to worthy causes, it's money the state doesn't need to collect in taxes to help fund this cause, which is presumably why the government allows you a tax deduction on such donations.

Re:A Charity Organization?

[Anonymous Coward]

While in your sociaty you may have not felt the impact but mozilla and the ongoing efforts of linux and other O/S projects have been bridging the information divide in many of the poorer countries. For instance in Thailand their school net project is run entirely on Thai language Linux. It makes it easy for teachers to post up learning material in the Thai language. So these things do help out those that you might sooner forget. It is hard to quantify how much better society is getting only to say that every advance in technology has made a contribution to the betterment of the human race.

hmm...

[lingqi]

let's see how long it takes for the name "Malda" to come up here...

as of now (18:42 Dec 20 Tokyo Time) - I havn't found any /. editors on the said page yet.

Re:hmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll hardly find him there...

Most of slashdot authors use KDE - go ask them and see (heck, Rob even contributed some icons to KDE)..

Re:hmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should they feel obliged to? Have you donated anything?

but this contributes to free software which....

[Anonymous Coward]

may indirectly help poor nations become more efficient(i.e., upgrading the agricutural market) without having to dole out tons of money to microsoft.

Yes, and for a good reason.

[qwijibrumm]

When I think of all of the worthy charities that help the less-fortunate, the idea of a bunch of self-indulgent computer programmers taking advantage of our tax code like this is revolting.

Ok.... where do I start? First off, what makes you think that the GNOME project, or any free software project does not help the less fortunate. The GNOME project, along with the rest of GNU, is constantly being deployed in less developed countries. This helps provide education on computer use and programming skills to people who otherwise couldn't afford the expensive software. The fact of the matter is education is the key to break out of poverty. GNOME, as part of GNU provides this.

How the hell is any free software project self-indulgent? Maybe the feeling of skill and greatness when you submit a patch for a bug fix, but self-indulgent what are you talking about? These "self-indulgent" programmers provided me with a desktop environment, and I have scarcely given a thing back.(sorry I'm poor too.)

The people who make the GNOME project possible don't see a return short of feeding themselves, just like the Salvation Army, or the American Cancer Society. They clear their overhead and donate their product and services to anyone who needs them, just like any legitimate charity.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[fmaxwell]

First off, what makes you think that the GNOME project, or any free software project does not help the less fortunate.

To some small extent, it does. But it helps the fortunate far more. The majority of third-world countries have very few computers relative to their population. The amount of money that could be saved on software would have no discernible effect on the lives of their citizens.

The GNOME project, along with the rest of GNU, is constantly being deployed in less developed countries.

And it is good enough already. These people need food, clothing, shelter, and medicine, not a more polished version of a Linux GUI.

How the hell is any free software project self-indulgent?

Because it is a hobby for those involved. They do it for personal fulfillment.

They clear their overhead and donate their product and services to anyone who needs them, just like any legitimate charity.

Do you think that Habitat for Humanity will be donating buildings to Sun and RedHat? Of course not. They will donate them to needy families. Legitimate charities do not invest tax-deductible contributions to develop products that are resold by big business.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[ender81b]

Because it is a hobby for those involved. They do it for personal fulfillment.

And what exactly is a charity? Do you not donate to a charity to get some form of personal gratification for helping those in need, by giving some of your excess to further some goal that is dear to you?

While, in principle, I agree to you that Gnome is hardly my idea of a charitable organization I don't see any reason to criticize their work or call it, in so many words, a fraud of our tax code. I have seen more worthless charities than I care to see and Gnome is hardly an abuse of the current tax code. They donate their work to the public at large to be used however they want to use it and accept donations for the public. Is it traditional? No. Is it still a non-profit organization? Hell yes. Are you under some sort of odd obligation to support it? No. No one cares, if you want to support it do if you don't believe in supporting it don't.

Legitimate charities do not invest tax-deductible contributions to develop products that are resold by big business.

In so many words, fool. What do you call charities that accept sponorship of big companies? Advertisement plain and simple. This charity function funded in part by blah blah. Are they not, using your defination, simply 'selling themselves out' by allowing for their image/goodwill/goodworks to be used to advertise a business and tie to it? Ah but since they do, what YOU define as, good works that is ok? I say that by producing a legitemate, free, alternative to windows Gnome does many good works by allowing for a free desktop enviroment that can be used by any organization that can better spend the $200 it would normally spend on a os/GUI on more important things. In that sense Gnome is indeed a charity since the 200$ it would cost for, say, a windows XP liscene can be better spent feeding children/building houses/curing aids whatever.

Sigh. people need to *think* more.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[msobkow]

I kind of wish Sun weren't planning to use Gnome, as it would make it clearer to you that this whole business has nothing to do with supporting corporations.

Say I take a few million dollars (assuming I had it), and set up a park with some investments to fund maintenance of the park. No one is charged admission, and everyone is free to roam around whether they be stock broker or homeless bum. If some corporation chooses to have their annual picnic in that same park, is it now "supporting" business?

Of course not! It is still open to all, used by all, and is still not costing anyone admission.

The fact that some corp like Sun has chosen to use the "park" provided by Gnome does not make it a corporate pawn -- it just means another member of the community is accepting the offer to use the facilities.

While you may view free software projects as a "hobby", many of those who work on the projects believe in the good of what they are doing every bit as much as you do when you contribute to the charity of your choice. While there is a significant degree of ego and pride involved in contributing quality code, it is no more "self-indulgent" than your feeling of having "done good" when you write that donation check.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[fmaxwell]

What do you call charities that accept sponorship of big companies?

So that they can get money to do charitable work.

Advertisement plain and simple.

No, that's why the big companies donate. It's not why the charity accepts the donation.

Are they not, using your defination, simply 'selling themselves out' by allowing for their image/goodwill/goodworks to be used to advertise a business and tie to it?

No. The charity work that they do still benefits the needy. Suppose FedEx sponsors Habitat for Humanity. Both win. Habitat for humanity gets much-needed money and FedEx gets good press.

That's far different than Gnome taking tax-deductible donations and then creating a GUI that is sold by Sun/RedHat/etc.

I say that by producing a legitemate, free, alternative to windows Gnome does many good works by allowing for a free desktop enviroment that can be used by any organization that can better spend the $200 it would normally spend on a os/GUI on more important things.

Okay, suppose that the government of Sudan suddenly got all of their software for free. How much money would that save on a per-capita basis? This may come as a shock, but there is not a computer on every desk in Sudan. Libraries are not found in every city with Internet access readily available. There are a handful of computers in most third-world countries and whether the government buys $200 operating systems or gets them for free has no bearing on the lives of the millions of people that live in those countries.

What helps third-world countries is software designed to run on old, slow computers that lack the memory, hard drive capacity, and speed to run things like Gnome.

people need to *think* more.

Your last post was damned good evidence of that.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to think more. This whole issue is ridiculous, a bunch of geeks that doesn't want to work for a living just everyone else shouldn't be sponsored by the tax-payers like this!

They should go out and find a real job or they should _really_ help the needy with food, shelter and so on. Stop this nonsense.

It's outrageous!

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[ender81b]

For one I am an active member of save sub-saharan orphans and am not a fool when it comes to the problems facing third world countries. What I take objection to is people who automatically assume they are *Right* and that whatever person x is doing is *Wrong* like you are doing with this Gnome business. Let's take a look at your assertation that somehow what Gnome is doing by *shock* allowing it's product to be sold by SUn/Red Hat/etc is somehow wrong.

No. The charity work that they do still benefits the needy. Suppose FedEx sponsors Habitat for Humanity. Both win. Habitat for humanity gets much-needed money and FedEx gets good press.

No. The charity work that they do still benefits the needy. Suppose FedEx sponsors Gnome. Both Win. Gnome gets much-needed money to further develop a needed free GUI and Fedex gets good press.

THere is *no* difference between the two. None, except that one is more traditional so, according to your view, is more *right* somehow. It's a narrowminded view of the world.

Let's assume that, out of a population of 37,090,298 (Cia world factbook) 1/10 of 1 percent have a computer - that's 37,090 computers. Which, btw, is far, far below the actual number since the reported number of internet users is 50,000. At any rate if they would switch entirely to OSS they would save, at 200$ per computer, 7,418,000$ dollars. That's 7 million dollars that quite a big chunk of change. I would also point out that Gnome minimum system requirements are quite a bit less than the latest version of windows xp. I could also point out that Gnome will continue to be supported far longer than windows xp.

Alas, I would have more to say but I have to finish writing a 6 page paper due in 6 hours. Good day sir.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[Anonymous Coward]

You are assuming they buy their OS.

I seriously doubt this.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[fmaxwell]

Let's take a look at your assertation that somehow what Gnome is doing by *shock* allowing it's product to be sold by SUn/Red Hat/etc is somehow wrong.

It's not wrong and I never said that it was. What I see as wrong is treating Gnome as some kind of charity when they primary beneficiaries of their work are major, for-profit corporations.

No. The charity work that they do still benefits the needy. Suppose FedEx sponsors Gnome. Both Win. Gnome gets much-needed money to further develop a needed free GUI and Fedex gets good press.

NO NO NO NO NO!!!!

Let's make it simple:

1. You decide to donate $200 to charity.

2. Because they are now tax-deductible, you donate $100 to Gnome and the other $100 to the charity that would have gotten the whole $200 had Gnome not been tax-deductible.

3. The Feds give you $30 off of your taxes for your donation to Gnome.

4. Gnome puts the $100 towards improving Gnome.

5. Sun, RedHat, and Mandrake sell the improved Gnome, making millions of dollars.

6. The improvements to Gnome do not, in any way, significantly affect whether it is appropriate for use by a third-world government.

7. Where it is adopted by third world governments, computer software makes up such a tiny percentage of their budget that the savings is insignificant and does nothing to improve the lives of the citizens.

That is what I object to.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[r0ckflite]

Your whole 'taking money away from worthwhile charities' argument is total crap. I don't, at the beginning of the year, decide to donate 1% of my income. I don't earmark $1000 and decide to split it among charities. I see something I want, and I buy it. I gave a few bucks to PA, $100 to EFF. And then my wife donates to animal organizations (also evil charities as they only help animals not people, right?).

Your whole argument that gnome is taking away from charities is all BS! They aren't. Your view on basic human nature is skewed to support your argument. I was never going to give to your pet charity in the first place, so it has lost no support because of Gnome

And your statement that gnome and other OS projects shouldn't be charities may have some merit, because they aren't what one thinks of in terms of traditional charities, but I and others think they are worthwhile and may some day help in a small way to make the world a better place.

You're a damned charity snob. Get over yourself.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason.

[fmaxwell]

Your whole 'taking money away from worthwhile charities' argument is total crap.

No, it is not. Many people earmark certain dollar figures and percentages for charity. I know some of those people personally. You and your wife don't do it that way? That's fine. But there are more people in the world than you and your wife.

And your statement that gnome and other OS projects shouldn't be charities may have some merit, because they aren't what one thinks of in terms of traditional charities,

Thanks for saying that.

but I and others think they are worthwhile and may some day help in a small way to make the world a better place.

My concern is that the "help" is too small to justify making Gnome a tax-deductible charity.

Get over yourself.

I have tried. Really I have. But I am so damned impressive, intelligent, and knowledgeable that I just can't.

Donation & tax deductible

[nuggz]

When you give a tax deductible donation you aren't getting any money back. You just don't pay tax on the portion you are giving away.

You don't immediately not pay tax on the donation, it get summed up at the end of the year so you might see a return. But that is just because you overpaid your taxes throughout the year.

Myself I take it as an easy way to bump up my charitable contributions bye 30-40% since it is pre tax money.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Benefit

[nuggz]

Are you sure that you don't just prefer charities that create software that you personally benefit from?

Are yuo sure you don't just prefer charities that give you a warm fuzzy feeling?

We do things for our own reasons, in a free society you're allowed to.

Why don't you work to fix the law?

*sigh*

[msobkow]

That's far different than Gnome taking tax-deductible donations and then creating a GUI that is sold by Sun/RedHat/etc.

You can go to any number of websites, download the Gnome source, and build your own. The fact that someone else provides the service of doing the download and build for you (e.g. RedHat, SuSE, Mandrake, et. al.) doesn't make it "their" product.

You really like to focus on that misconception that the donations support the programmers who contribute. In fact you are so completely enamoured of that misconception that I'm going to just "walk away" at this point -- I have a feeling I'd have an easier time converting a Southern Baptist preacher to Hinduism than convincing you to let go of that fantasy.

Re:*sigh*

[fmaxwell]

You really like to focus on that misconception that the donations support the programmers who contribute.

I don't care if it supports them, buys them donuts, or pays for the rental on a conference center.

In fact you are so completely enamoured of that misconception that I'm going to just "walk away" at this point

Okay. Bye!!!

Donations?

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Gnome Foundation created with the backing of several large and influential corporations such as IBM? The same IBM that stated it was committing 1 BILLION dollars USD to Linux. Also, isn't Sun Microsystems another of the founding members? The same Sun that is standardizing on Gnome for their desktop. Why should we donate money to a Foundation that is clearly guided by corporate interests? Talk about corporate welfare.

BTW the major players are:
IBM
HP/Compaq
Sun Microsystems

Let them pay for it.

Ximian Desktop

[yerricde]

Instead of giving the product away why not simply charge for it?

Ximian does sell boxed distributions of Ximian Desktop based on the GNOME desktop for 30 USD.

Thanks!!!

[fmaxwell]

Thank you for taking the time to post that. Given the attitude on here, you would think that Gnome is destined to cure cancer, wipe out AIDS, and end world hunger. It's just a graphical user interface to Linux.

Karma^H^H^H^H^H^ Corporate Whoring

[Anonymous Coward]

See, I TOLD you we shouldn't have let RMS know about money!

not just citizens

[djembe2k]

. . . and this year, they become a charity organization, meaning that contributions for US citizens will be tax deductions. Yay, tax deductions!

Last I checked, nobody checked your citizenship before they collected your tax dollars. All U.S. taxpayers, whether citizens or not, are entitled to tax deductions when they contribute to a registered 501(c)3 organization.

Re:not just citizens

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure they do. There is a question asking your citizenship status on every tax form as well as marital status and so forth. I don't know how deductions work with noncitizens but it is still a factor.

11.5 Million Americans short of food...

[Anonymous Coward]

They say charity begins at home, don't they?

Tax write-off mania

[filmcritic]

Contribute to gnome and get a tax deduction. Sun, IBM and others contribute (rather CARRY) this project and they get a tax deduction for appearing to help out "those less fortunate". That's funny. Gnome almost seems to be a charity organization when those items are brought to light but they are not...and no the .org doesn't count.

Re:Tax write-off mania

[JamesHenstridge]

The GNOME Foundation is not a money laundering operation, like you seem to be implying.

The major way companies like Sun, Ximian and Red Hat help is by employing people to work on GNOME. They don't get a tax deduction for hiring people to work on GNOME.

The GNOME Foundation does not employ any developers (it has one employee: Tim Ney, the executive director, who does a lot of the organisational work). You can find details of what the Foundation does at foundation.gnome.org/.

Re:Tax write-off mania

[filmcritic]

I didn't say it was laundering money. It's just kinda funny that now the everyday average person can get a writeoff by donating, just like the big companies. And don't make the mistake of thinking that all that cash IBM, Sun, etc. are throwing at Red Hat and the like is not being written off. Only a fool would let that amount of money go to waste.

open source =/= $$$$$

[v(*_*)vvvv]

So, Problem:

1. write code
2. open source it
3. ???
4. ???
5. Profit!!!

Possible Answer:

3. Create a non-profit org
4. Beg

Now, if this isn't just screaming OPEN SOURCE HAS NO BUSINESS MODEL, then could someone please enlighten my soul.

Sure, I have absolutely nothing against open source, but I do have a problem understanding how open source puts bread on the table, and brings electricity to your computer. Possible WRONG Answer: "err.. provide expensive support"

Re:open source =/= $$$$$

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like flamebait, but I'll bite.

• Even if Gnome doesn't have a business model (I'm not familiar with their case), that doesn't speak for all open-source projects. Some of us open-source developers are doing just fine financially, which is a lot more than I can say for a lot of closed-source developers in this post-dot-bomb era.
  
• It puts bread on the table the same way closed-source software would put bread on the table: I write the code, I give it to my employer, they give me money.
  

The people who use it don't give a rat's ass whether I release it as open-source or leave it locked in a vault. In practice, they much prefer it being open-source, because people all over the world can use and improve it. But if I wanted to keep it locked up, they'd probably go along with that, too.

So if you want a step-by-step business model, it might look something like this:

1. Hire somebody to write software
   
2. Release it as open-source, thus getting free upgrades, suggestions, and bug fixes from gullible hackers all over the world
   
3. Do cool shit with aforementioned software, which (because it was written on-site) is perfectly tailored to your needs
   
4. Profit!
   

Re:open source =/= $$$$$

[v(*_*)vvvv]

I have no issues with your reply whatsoever, except for the transition between 3 and 4. Sure, the community gets your code. Sure, great hacks are done, customization is achieved. But 4, no. Why? The people you would sell it to already own it, because everybody owns it. You cannot sell something you do not own. If it is not your property you have nothing to sell.

The only way to make money off of GPLed code is to pretend you own it, and sell it to the clueless. Customization, consulting, support, whatever, are all good indirect ways to make money off of GPLed code, but the same can be said for proprietary code. The bottom line is the code is worth zero dollars, and that is precisely why they are begging for money.

Non-profit vs. Charity

[FiskeBoller]

The charity discussion has been heatedly myoptic.

There are plenty of non-profit organizations that benefit society, many of which don't go to help the poor or dying. Have you ever planted trees, picked up trash, or given to NPR (National Public Radio)? These types of programs benefit many people and as a whole help improve life (and have nothing to do with the poor or fighting cancer). In the case of NPR, people literally are donating to support an alternative source of news and information that is accessible to all.

It seems to me that GNOME, or any OSS project for that matter, falls into the category of providing an alternative computing resource that is freely accessible to the public. As such, it sounds like an excellent candidate for 501(3)c status.

Some people are irked that GNOME is bundled by commerical entities such as Red Hat. Consider how many other free things get re-packaged and sold successfully (Pet rocks come to mind, as do many free Government publications). In these cases, people are not paying for the commodity good (rocks or docs) but the "perceived value" derived from the final assembled product. The value in Red Hat may be in the distribution (it's conveniently available on my computer retailer's shelves), or on the services they provide to customers. GNOME is a commodity piece in the assembled whole.

No thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

I will start to contribute money as soon as they come down from their high horse and start to work on a unified document model for Gnome and KDE...

So now taxpayers are paying for Gnome?

[geekee]

"and this year, they become a charity organization, meaning that contributions for US citizens will be tax deductions. Yay, tax deductions!"

Great so now my tax dollars are effectively paying for Gnome, since anyone who deducts their donations is taking money out of the tax pool. Thanks a lot for forcing me to pay for your software. What a bunch of communists.

What is Gnome didn't exist anymore?

[bogie]

And take this anyway you want. What if GNOME were to "go under"?(not that that's even really possible since the code is free) Since most distros with the notable exception of Redhat have standardized on KDE, having Redhat switch to KDE would then for the first time have Linux as a whole presenting a unified desktop to the world. For the first time, with the exception of some difference in the naming of menus, you would be able to sit down in front of any of the big desktop distros and see the same desktop. I'm not saying I want that to happen, other then the desire to see ANY unified desktop, but still one does wonder where GNOME would be without Redhat. Of course this doesn't mean fluxbox users can't switch to that, but the thing I've heard year after year from the big commercial desktop vendors is that beyond being too small a market, the linux desktop from the outside seems too fragmented. There's not doubt in my mind that having all the big desktop vendors finally on one desktop would be a step in the right direction towards more widespread linux adoption. Remember I'm not talking about restricting choice to run another WM, so save your "choice is good" speechs for someone else. Most people who use linux want to see it used on a more widespread basis. Having a unified look is one the first steps.

What has Gnome done this year?

[ArmorFiend]

What has gnome done this year that's worth paying for? It seems like I only ever hear about how they're eagerly embracing "Microsoft .THIS and .THAT". I haven't noticed any gnome improvement for quite some time.

Well if Abiword finally supported tables, that would be something. However I know how to support Abiword more directly than giving to these guys. =)

(I see you marking this as a troll, but really, I AM interested to know if they've done anything that I care about.)

Re:Yes, and for a good reason. [OT]

[msobkow]

I have tried. Really I have. But I am so damned impressive, intelligent, and knowledgeable that I just can't.

*LOL* This discussion would have been ever so much more entertaining in person. You are tenacious, persistent, and firm in your beliefs. Fine fuel for a fun after-meal discussion group. (Surely you didn't think I had anything against you personally just because I disagree with your opinion on the current subject!)

Here's how to get me to donate

[Anonymous Coward]

You want my money? Fine. Find some way to merge GNOME and KDE. I don't care if you kill KDE, I don't care if you kill GNOME, I don't care if you take the best of both or even come up with something new.

Your money would go a lot further if efforts at creating a good user experience on Linux weren't cut in half each step of the way.

When you guys stop fighting and learn to use open competition for good instead of stupid, I'll be more than happy to give you my money.

Get the fire arrows, we've got us a troll!

[Anonymous Coward]

You call pro-GPL sentiment "Communist" licensing views?

That sounds like an awfully "extremist" attitude to me.

(Hint: IP protections do not exist in nature. The GPL [and esp. BSD license] is as lassiez-faire as they come.)

Perhaps you should read it before resuming your trolling.

Gnome vs. Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Sir, said I, or Madam, you are a troll!

Tax-deductions are a way to keep your money from going into the general tax pool (where it may be spent on gawd knows what pork-barrel projects), and put that same money into a cause that of the donator's choice.

In no way are you subsidizing this if you don't want to, and to imply that you somehow deserve the money in my pocket is offensive!

On top of that, you have the gall to call other people communists, when it is you, dear poster, who has demonstrated the utmost contempt for a person's right to spend his own money as he chooses.

Go crawl back under your rock, troll. I hear the sun rising.

Actually.... ;-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Curing disease and ending world hunger are scheduled for the 3.0 release...

They haven't included these features up till now because they haven't come up with good desktop icons for them yet.

Re:Yes, and for a good reason. [OT]

[fmaxwell]

*LOL* This discussion would have been ever so much more entertaining in person. You are tenacious, persistent, and firm in your beliefs. Fine fuel for a fun after-meal discussion group. (Surely you didn't think I had anything against you personally just because I disagree with your opinion on the current subject!)

My apologies for taking things too personally in the first place. I, too, think that many of the discussions on here would be a lot more civilized and fun in-person. I guess the anonymous cowards would just have to show up with bags over their heads.

Peace.

Clarification

[msobkow]

Rereading through some of the posts, it struck me that the comment about my grandfather's pancreatic cancer could imply that he was being selfish by clinging to life.

While he lived far longer than the doctors expected, it wasn't due to a lot of treatment. They tried chemo briefly, but did not continue when it had no useful effect. His last six months were spent in bed, sleeping 12-16 hours a day as the morphine knocked him out. He lived as long as he did because he wanted to, not because of some miraculous expensive life-stretching procedures.

Last Post!

[alpg]

"We're not talking about the same thing," he said. "For you the world is
weird because if you're not bored with it you're at odds with it. For me
the world is weird because it is stupendous, awesome, mysterious,
unfathomable; my interest has been to convince you that you must accept
responsibility for being here, in this marvelous world, in this marvelous
desert, in this marvelous time. I wanted to convince you that you must
learn to make every act count, since you are going to be here for only a
short while, in fact, too short for witnessing all the marvels of it."
-- Don Juan

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...