NGI Zero open source funding
The @sovtechfund is offering grants to people who contribute to a sustainable open source ecosystem. Grants go up to €300,000 per application and cover three main topics:
1. Improve FOSS Developer Tooling
2. Securing FOSS Software Production
3. FOSS Infrastructure Documentation
With this program, the Sovereign Tech Fund seeks to stimulate an open digital infrastructure: fundamental technologies that enable the creation of other software.
https://sovereigntechfund.de/en/challenges/ #opensource
Three Challenges to Contribute Back to Open Source
UPDATE Looks like people are also arguing this point https://shared-digital.eu/statement/
We are pouring public funding down the drain agen, these criteria are feeding the #geekproblem not actually trying to take the “problem” out of our geek paths. The people who PUSH this agenda are the problem – please POINT at them and talk about this mess, thanks.
Can we get a link to the people making the agenda, thanks, will try polite conversation #4opens
I worked with the guy who used to be behind the #NGIzero account, we did good stuff with the #EU outreach.
The replacement, I have no idea who they are and getting #blocking
This is a #4opens fail.
In all these toots am talking past “people” to talk about things/social/groups and not directly to individuals, they are second in all these conversations. This is the place where social value lives. The problem is, we don’t have hardly any of this… which is the subject am talking about.
#blocking is not seeing this, addressing this, the is a lot of blocking going on 😉
Am happy to talk to “individuals” as a first step.
Pouring money down the drain, because the majority of the problems in the #Fediverse and the #openweb are social not technical – if they only fund technical parts of this culture they are feeding the “problem” and this problem is going to pour the resources down the drain.
I understand this is a hard conversation to have, we have to try.
First step is #4opens, WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE PUSHING MESS while doing “good”, step into the light please #openprocess
Ignoring this basic #openprocess is #blocking, this is why conversations are done in public #4opens
yes, I understand the fear this creates and the desire to #block, but this then makes the #4opens fail more visible if people wont to use this for the needed change and challenge if they don’t yes it’s more noise what are you signal or noise 🙂
Signal vs Nose.
I find #mainstreaming people to be actually mad and increasingly bad. When do we get more #4opens people pushing change challenge in these #openweb spaces, please?
Am increasingly seeing this #blocking as a culture of fear, or more real as a culture of fear pushed as power politics.
Am thinking meany people will be confused and likely mix signal with noise on this subject.
Who are the bad people, the powerless pushing the #4opens on the #openweb or the powerful Burocrats worshipping the #deathcult while protecting these thin careers in the #mainstreaming
If you find yourself agenst the first and defending the second, then you are the problem.
This makes your behaver noise, and what you do very likely to be more #techshit to compost.
I wonder if people understand what activism is on the #openweb any more?
You talk to people to explane why they are doing WRONG, and at the same time you push them as HARD as you can to change their wrong behaver.
This works best with the #fluffy #spiky debate as a core part of this process.
People who keep saying “why can’t we all get along”, and “wouldent it go better if we were nice to each other” and the PROBLEM blocking the activism from having the needed affect…
Very Oxford, the event is about the terms academics use to study war and conflicts, it’s about words and categories about violence. How the skinny non-violent crew talk about the muscular dangerous crew.
This is a 
