According to the latest annual report from the Linux Foundation (LF), less than 3% of its budgetary resources are allocated to the thing it is named after!
It’s nice of this poster to ignore the $181m spent on “other projects” and conclude this is some kind of scam. If we include the Linux Kernel with the other projects part, that’s about 67%, or two thirds, of their expenses are paying for various and assorted open source projects. Among them the kernel. So if you’re a “cash and cash alone” person, then 2/3rds of your money is still going as cash to software projects.
And if we include things like community tooling and project services, which may help a project in ways beyond just cash that becomes about 78% in total, or over three quarters.
That’s pretty good, I think, but to each their own.
Well yeah only 3% go to the kernel. Most of the rest seems to be going to everything else required for a functional OS. The kernel alone is fairly useless.
the kernel alone is fairly useless
Any essential part is usually fairly useless without the other parts
So what you’re saying is it’s not Linux, it’s somethingElse/Linux ?
You see, that’s just inaccurate. GNU/Linux is not equivalent to GNU+Linux. That would be addition; this is division. The bigger Linux gets, the smaller GNU/Linux becomes.
That’s why they’ve developed GNU/Hurd. Hurd is unlikely to ever amount to much, meaning that GNU/Hurd will never evaluate to a small value. And that is cold, hard mathematical fact.
Hurd rescently became an option with Gentoo Linux (experimentally). Debian offers it too.
As does Arch AFAIK. It’s still very nice, thought.
Its software packages required to build functional GNU/Linux operating systems. Yes.
Normal people just call all of this “linux” for simplicity, but annoying people keep feeling a need to point out the distinction.
Right. And that somethingElse is probably not Unix
Or as I like to call it, somethingElse+Linux
GNU stands for “GNU’s not Unix”, which itself means ‘GNU’s not Unix not Unix’. If two nots logically undo each other then you might say
GNU is Unixbut in programming you would likly apply one assignment at a time: expressed as GNU = ! Unix = Unix or simply GNU’s not Unix.
Seems to be going to Corporate Operations, Event Services, Project Support. But little goes to Linux kernel, and project infrastructure.
What do you think Project Support is?
Yeah, the money’s “going to” two of the least funded categories in the chart. 🙄
Mhm, I think this is more complicated than it looks. The LF today isn’t a direct Linux kernel funding body and more an umbrella for open-source governance (infrastructure, events, certification, security work, to name a few). So the other 97% are not necessarily wasted. Also, many kernel developers are paid outside of the LF by companies like Red Hat, Google, AMD, SUSE, Microsoft. So in reality there is alot more cash flowing towards Linux kernel development. A better/sharper criticism would be that the LF has become an industry consortium for “enterprise open source” or so, rather than a Linux-centered foundation. The counterpoint on the other Hand is that this founded infrastructure is exactly what allows large-scale open-source projects to function in the first place.
There could well be a kernel of valid criticism in it but this article is so exaggerated and strident, that I can’t take it seriously. It’s like people who scream GOVERNMENT WASTE about every budget line item that is not obviously important to someone who has only the most simple and ignorant understanding of it.
yeah, some of the budget goes to what looks like maintaining infrastructure that other projects use (i assume). but the 12% AI and 4% blockchain are pretty indefensible…
I love crypto and open source tooling around it, what is supposed to be indefensible about it?
Corpos doing what corpos do better.
12% to AI
Yikes
that was the most worrying part of it to me; nothing is safe from ai apparently.
Sincerely, what did you expect? I mean, obviously it’s hyped right now, but let’s be real - AI is not going to go away anymore.
The linux foundation does not care about linux. They don’t even use it.
I can tell you from personal experience this is not true, they use linux.
I cannot challenge your personal experience. But during some live talks, they were seen using macs with macos. and some documents produced using a macos related tooling in metadata.
Since when is knowing how to use one operating system proof that you don’t use another?
I did not say “know how to use”, but “use”. If you are advocating for a product, then you use it publicly ain’t that right? Imagine Coca-cola crew publicly drinking Pepsi. Or mcdonalds directory not eating his own burgers.
That’s awful. That’s why I’m not a member or donor. They are just using the name to make money.
