• Aeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    5 days ago

    I didn’t know that the government was funding these things to begin with, but I don’t know many things.

    • RepleteLocum
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      5 days ago

      Because foss projects like tor are regularly used by the agencies. It’s little money for a lot of work they don’t need to do.

    • aizakku@waterloolemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      5 days ago

      I also didn’t know this, but really we should all be putting money behind FOSS (myself included). We don’t need billionaires.

  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    6 days ago

    So I guess funds were cut, but then the courts ruled the president doesn’t have authority to do this himself since the funds were allocated by congress, and so as of now they have been restored, although congress needs to approve them every year and there’s concern they might not do so for next year.

    • Midnitte@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      6 days ago

      Until Trump ignores court orders and cuts funding anyway.

      Supreme Court will probably rule that while congress has the power of the purse, the president has the power of canceling the credit cards in the wallet, because fuck you that’s why

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 days ago

        Well, this is what the relevant part of the video says:

        USAGM disbursed $7.5M to these entities, in “what seemed to be an effort to delay the hearing or woo the judge”. Regardless, the latter has sided against USAGM, and just a few days ago, the agency has decided to back off and release the funds for the 2025 fiscal year.

  • Paddy66@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    6 days ago

    Urgh this is so backwards.

    Governments need to fund more FOSS not less!

    Hopefully the EU can increase its support to compensate.

    • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      6 days ago

      Foss is free, and this guy is all about making the American people pay more money to his rich buddies

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        He’s doing a suck job of it. The things he’s gutting are pennies towards his dark-souled oligarch masters. Cutting small government projects like the NEA, PBS or like FOSS grants is only used as an appeal to fiscal responsibility conservatives that aren’t willing to cut into old-people benefits like Social Security and military sacred cows. Not because gutting tiny projects does anything useful, rather it gives the vibe that representatives are doing something.

        This is an appeal to the imbicile MAGA though the tech bros might have specific FOSS projects that compete with their own commercial offerings. Not enough to cut all FOSS grants, though.

        • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 days ago

          In essence he’s trying to bankrupt the whole country so he and his circle can buy it all up. He’s trying to do the same thing that was done in Russia when the ussr collapsed.

    • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 days ago

      Or China! Open source is basically digital communism so maybe they’ll step in and support it like they did with the World Health Organization

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      ikr, i can’t believe this administrative did something backwards this time.

    • NOPper@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 days ago

      We need them here now more then ever unfortunately. But yeah, stay safe and spread out for sure.

      They’re the only thing I wear tee shirts for, have stickers all over my gear, and talk about way too often. Underappreciated champions of the people and nobody outside of these kinds of circles knows who the hell they are.

  • misteloct@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    If you use these services, please donate once or regularly if you’re able. They are free as in puppy, not beer - dev work costs money. I would guess many people using Tor/privacy tools are tech savvy enough to have financial comfort due to a good career. If you do it you’re doing an everyday act of rebellion for the sake of progress!!!

      • BoulevardBlvd
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 days ago

        “free” when you find it on the side of the road, but expensive to actually maintain without having it die on you.

        The download is free, but pay for it or it’s going to die.

  • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    While it sucks that FOSS projects will have their funding sapped, let’s remember why the open source model is used in the first place: it can’t be bought. If it goes down, someone will just fork the last known repository and have it up and running again.

  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    5 days ago

    Lets encrypt could run a patreon and stay funded. Plenty of people with money depend on them.

  • Zoop@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 days ago

    I really appreciate that there’s a text version for those of us who can’t or won’t use videos! Thank you so much for sharing it, too. 💙

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      78
      ·
      6 days ago

      This is not an example of leopards eating someone’s face. Unless those projects threw their support behind Trump’s admin, and I have no reason to believe they did, this is simply falling victim to fascist idiots.

    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      6 days ago

      Uhh… these projects are the backbone of the free and modern web. How is less funding a good thing?

      • Not the one you answered to, but I think I can understand the idea of US funding having been a toxic source of dependency, and it being better in the long run to get money elsewhere. That “elsewhere” is a good question, though.

        Just me, personally, my dream would be an international fund, carried by the UN or maybe an independent NGO, that can get funding from both private and public funds, that prioritises free internet access the way the WHO prioritises health. But I think that’s still far off.

        • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 days ago

          US funding having been a toxic source of dependency, and it being better in the long run to get money elsewhere.

          Yup, pretty much my intent, that and the insecurity it engenders, rather surprised by the reaction.

          • eldavi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 days ago

            the reaction makes sense; these organizations are modeled after for-profit corporations since that’s where most of its leaders come from and oriented towards simpler modes of funding like the american gov’t; this is effectively a disaster for this sort of posture and it’s hard from them to imagine any other form.

        • Matengor@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Isn’t the OTF already an NGO that can receive funding from different sources?

          • Kind of, I wouldn’t really call them an international organisation in the way I would be imagining, see how easy it was to cut their funding when national interests turned openly fascist. Their affiliation with the US government above more independent, international organisations meant, that they would support privacy and a free and open internet, as long as it helps dissidents in other, non-aligned countries, but quick to cut it, if it reaches their own doorsteps.

      • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        Not sure if this is meant here, but shockingly many people believe that “funding” something equals to “controlling” it.

      • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        Not a good thing, just an inevitable one, as they conflict with the interests of the US (oligarchs and techbros).

      • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        How could you read it that way ? I’m saying eventually they were going to conflict with the interests of the US (oligarchs and techbros) and lose funding. Shocker, it happened under cheeto.

          • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            Yeah, I have a broader view of the phrase, which includes complacency (not actively working at alternatives) as well as just voting, seems most agree with you.

            • Harvey656@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              6 days ago

              Having a broader view of a phrase just means you didn’t understand the phrase. It’s okay to admit that.

  • HiroProtagonist@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Does this government funding really ever result in a hands off approach. In the case of Tor I wouldn’t be surprised that funding comes with backdoor access.

    • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 days ago

      TOR fundamentally cannot be backdoored. The US government funds it because more traffic on the network helps mask the traffic coming from CIA agents and the like

        • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          No system can be proven to have no exploits, but a backdoor is when there is a hidden prepared exploit planted on the inside (in this case presumably because they were funded by the government they assume they would get this in return, even though if that was the case they would do a crypto transaction and not openly fund them)

      • HiroProtagonist@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        The last reply I will make.

        From September 19 2024

        “In response, the Tor Project acknowledged that one user of an outdated application called Ricochet was likely deanonymized through a “guard discovery attack.” However, they emphasized that this vulnerability has since been patched in current versions of Tor software.”

        https://cybersecuritynews.com/tor-claims-network-safe/

        • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Excuse me? Are you saying using guard discovery is a backdoor someone gave to the government? I mean, you can think whatever, but the technology isn’t really… backdoorable? It doesn’t make sense in the context. Where will the backdoor lead? It has no where to go.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 days ago

            (I am a different person, not arguing anything about this particular vulnerability or the government’s funding of Tor.)

            I think you’re defining backdoor too literally. I get your point, but colloquially it just means to get something nefarious in. If someone is saying “the government has a backdoor in an encryption algorithm” it would mean they believe the government has a vulnerability in that allows them to easily break the encryption, not necessarily a separate “door” or something.

            • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Yeah the government has an institutional thing I forget what it is called, with massive amount of known exploits. That’s not backdoors. A backdoor is a “planted” exploit, not a discovered exploit. It makes no sense to call all exploits backdoors.

          • HiroProtagonist@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Okay buddy keep it going as long as you need to. You might enjoy Reddit more, it’s a safe space for people who cannot change their opinions. Bye.

            • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Why? I am trying to understand what you mean so I can change my opinion. I’m not changing it because you are fuming and escalating the aggression, in fact, that has the exact opposite effect