Can copyleft force corporation to donate?

No idea how you got to the number of $200k, but it looks like we won’t find out, because apparently nobody cares enough about a 3d stack to organize the funding. Which I imagine is a taxing and very divers job. You need to design the funding campagne, have a trustworthy handler of all that money, need someone to find and oversee the developers doing the actual work. Plus probably a dozen more things I’d never think of.
Obviously not a walk in the park there isn’t even a failed attempt yet…


3 posts were split to a new topic: Roadmaps and R1

No, fiat currency is currency not backed by a limited commodity. The US Dollar, for example, is not backed by gold or any other limited commodity, and as such, they can print as much as they want.

1 Like

This is a functional truth of all currencys. There’s always a cost in debasing currency. Crypto trys to solve this in a novel energy intensive way. This is not the way.

It’s a hypothetical conversation, i actually think if they’re were devs both capable and trustworthy, the community would rally behind fixed goals. The broader point i was making that you obviously glossed over

Is that an insult to the current developers being either incapable or untrustworthy?

This is turning into a flame-fest. To answer the question in the original posted title: No. Copyleft cannot force corporations to donate.


How is it not the way? Also certain currencies can’t be debased, like Bitcoin, for example, which is a deflationary currency, meaning there’s a cap to the total number of them that can be minted ever, and once they’ve all been minted, the number of bitcoin will eventually dwindle, keeping its value up.

I see.
open source is sorts of morality thing, not economic thing.
it is the fate.
most of open source are toys.
only some lucky one can be useful and famous enough .
because open source have no such power to handle corporation.

It solves issues with cross-architecture and some cross-os problems in addition to the obvious black-box problems with closed-source. Bytecodes solve some of the problems with closed-source code but not all.

1 Like

it is morality thing which users care about, not corporation.
open source be existence with the morality reason.
but close-source still be the major of the world with economic reason.

so, i ask again and again.
is there any other way to bring money for open source?
except morality donation.
the answer is no.
maybe one day, people don’t need to work for money with life.
then, open source will be the major of the world.

Well, if you have questions about open source or free software there´s lots of resources available on the internet for you to read, without us having to repeat it here.
I´d start with Open-source software - Wikipedia (from a more or less neutral point of view) and Philosophy of the GNU Project - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (from a GNU point of view). I chose the links to the english version, but maybe there are also translations to your native language.

Hope that helps at least a bit to explain how open source software works (or is supposed to work)

1 Like

there are about more than 600 kinds of open source system in
but, only several of them are popular.
most of them are hobby.
even their forums are dead.

this is the circle of open source.
only several one have luck to break the circle with saint’s power.
i know what is open source and how it work.
it is good.
but not good enough to be the major of the world.

What about offering something that would the businesses find interesting to make them fund the project? I’m not talking about working for the company, but working in certain features that companies could want or need.

Another option could be finding funds in the public sector, or education.

1 Like

it is hard to do.
well, you can see the situation.

some programmers want to work for fun, not only money.
some users are tired with the black-close-software.
corporation want some new way to innovate or catch up.

so, open source flash out with copyleft and morality donation.

the biggest bug of open source, it is hard to get the programmer’s goal with only morality donation.

if these programmers have stable income, the open source project will grow up ( even slowly).
if these programners be unemployed, the open source project will frozen down.

so, is your solution way keeping programmers with funny status?
it is the key.

I like how Bitwarden is a for profit company that employs staff but makes open-source products. I don’t know if they will be in the black when the seed money runs out though.

If the computer/operating system landscape was different then there might be some money in operating systems. Maybe that’s the real problem for Haiku. There’s no money in operating systems so you can’t employ developers profitably. The fact that it is open-source may not be it’s main problem. If computers always sold without an OS and you had to buy one separately and there were no corrupt hardware/software deals, things would be more interesting…

Also, you have to write millions of lines of code before you have a saleable product (maybe it’s not always millions, how many is it for Haiku?). That’s way more than writing an app. A capitalist startup can’t survive that long while it’s waiting for the product to be finished.


I agree that writing an operating system is never profitable in isolation. The applications that run on it is where an operating system shows its worth. I doubt that C++ has a novel enough approach to OOP to make a new ABI differentiable from other operating systems. It would take too much new software to make anything take full advantage of Haiku’s features. There needs to be a few types of apps that are streamlined by its features enough to make Haiku reach critical mass so it starts to blow away competition.

I had hoped that using the WASI ABI in WebAssembly would get a beneficial enough performance uplift from using a smaller kernel than the mainstream companies could counter with. Now it looks like Google may try to counter that by using Zircon. Can Haiku stand up against that?

I know that Haiku stands a better chance than MorphOS because MorphOS isn’t POSIX compliant enough to run WASI code out if the box (nor is any Amiga-like OS).

If Haiku’s community doesn’t get off their high horse and start focusing on streamlining porting processes and incorporating foreign function interfaces, that may be what sinks Haiku’s boat. New software without brand recognition won’t sell the OS to anybody, regardless of the fancy database driven filesystem and the streamlined stack-and-tile GUI design.


In summary, an operating system is just plumbing, heating and air conditioning. Without applications lining the walls, the Haiku house will freeze its pipes without insulation. An operating system by itself does not make an ecosystem.

Sink haikus boat… as in not getting mainstream adoption, as it is now?

I don‘t see how that matters, this is still a hobby project for me and most of the other developers.

Not sure why you are coming with webassembly again, honestly.


We are very much trying to build an ecosystem of apps here. If the goal was just to run existing apps, and do it in a way that’s sustainable in capitalist terms, we would do it like any other commercial company-backed project does: we would do a Linux distribution. Something like Ubuntu. That would save a lot of tim and money. If your goal i just to run existing apps, why would you pay engineers to write an entire OS from scratch? Maybe you will get them to build a desktop environment, at best. Or maybe you will just apply some custom theming to an existing opensource one. But why would you build a kernel for that?

The goal of Haiku is to provide a nice and simple system, with tightly integrated applications (I don’t think this goal is reachable in any way with ports). If you like this goal, you can donate to Haiku already. We see how much money this brings in (not a lot). But the ship isn’t sinking, on the contrary, the developer team is in full control and we know exactly where we want to bring the ship, and we’re going there. We’re going slowly, sure. But we’ve been doing so for a very long time and our passengers (or users) are happy about it, otherwise, they would jump ships, and this forum would be dead and inactive.

You think you can do it faster? Well, start your own project. Make a fork, or try bolting an extra engine to the existing one, and see what happens.


I like this attitude. It cheers me. I hope most Haiku people primarily want a great foundation for native apps and continue to want that in the future. I see foreign apps as safety nets or bandages. I’m glad they’re there (especially Falkon) but they don’t excite me of give me a sense of fun.