Linux Fund Loses MasterCard Funding Source

An anonymous reader writes "The Linux Fund was established in 1999 to provide grants to free and open source software projects from funds raised via a credit card featuring a picture of Tux, the Linux penguin. This credit card was offered through MBNA America Bank, which was purchased in 2006 by Bank of America. Last week, LinuxFund credit card holders received mail from Bank of America informing them that the LinuxFund card would be discontinued. Linux.com has a few details about the end of the credit card including statements from executive director David Mandel, assuring that the LinuxFund will look different but will continue. In the past, the LinuxFund provided one-time grants of $500-$1,000 USD to many projects including SDL, FilmGimp, Xiph.org Foundation, CrystalSpace, K12LTSP, and Kismet. The LinuxFund stagnated in 2003, and in 2005 it was revitalized by new leaders and by 2006 provided a stable $6,000 per year contribution to a number of larger projects including Wikipedia, Blender, Debian, Gentoo, and OpenSSH." Linux.com and Slashdot are both part of OSTG.

It does not matter that much...

[bogaboga (793279)]

...why? Because the development of Linux up to this point, a point where Microsoft and other companies give it respect, has largely depended on volunteers. Linux will live on.

Re:It does not matter that much...

[by Anonymous Coward]

You are very naive if you think this. Linux got to the point it is today because of the push by big money for Linux. Novell, Red Hat, and IBM have all been instrumental in pushing Linux to where it is today. If Red Hat and SuSE (now Novell) hadn't made viable commercial solutions for Linux, it would not have even competed with AIX, HP-UX and Solaris. IBM has been such a huge source for Linux that they even made their OS more compatible with it, when they introduced AIX 5L (guess what that 'L' stands for). AIX uses similar command syntax as Linux, it is also the only one of the three (AIX, HP-UX and Solaris) that I have seen provide RPM support. Many of the open source packages that have been ported to AIX can easily be installed using an RPM, instead of having to use the default AIX installation mechanism or re-compiling source yourself. All the ports for HP-UX and Solaris that I have seen, still use the OS default installation mechanisms, which are not always the most intuitive or friendly to use.

Honestly, I think a lot more Linux development and advancement has come from BIG money then it ever did from the volunteers. There are a good deal of contributions being made by people with a monetary interest in the success of Linux.

Re:It does not matter that much...

[gujo-odori (473191)]

While I do not dispute this, one thing that needs to be remembered is that many of the people now being paid to work on Linux by Red Hat, IBM, et al, are the same people who worked on Linux for free for a long time and brought it to the point where those companies thought it worth paying people to work on it.

If you look at the percentage of code in Linux that was written by people now being paid to work on Linux but who were volunteers when they contributed it, a different picture might emerge. This doesn't discount wholesale contributions of code such as XFS by SGI or JFS by IBM, but without the work of volunteers, including those now being paid, Linux would simply not exist.

Re:It does not matter that much...

[SydShamino (547793)]

? I was under the impression that Linux got where it is today because companies like IBM, Novell, and Red Hat paid their employees to work on open source code, organizations like OSDN paid people like Linus Torvalds to manage and organize the material, funders like the Linux Fund and (recently) Google's Summer of Code provided grants for smaller developers, and, finally, some people contributed volunteer work.

I certainly wouldn't want to criticize the work done by unpaid volunteers, but I would have to doubt that they now represent a "large" portion of the code in Linux, either in terms of lines in the kernal or features.

Re:

[B|nky (35330)]

? I was under the impression that Linux got where it is today because companies like IBM, Novell, and Red Hat paid their employees to work on open source code, organizations like OSDN paid people like Linus Torvalds to manage and organize the material, funders like the Linux Fund and (recently) Google's Summer of Code provided grants for smaller developers, and, finally, some people contributed volunteer work. I certainly wouldn't want to criticize the work done by unpaid volunteers, but I would have to doubt that they now represent a "large" portion of the code in Linux, either in terms of lines in the kernal or features.

In that case, I think you may be surprised by this [lwn.net].

Re:It does not matter that much...

[RajivSLK (398494)]

Did you read the article you linked to? Only 7.7% of contributions were from comfirmed volunteers...

Quote: ..at least 65% of the code which went into 2.6.20 was created by people working for companies. If the entire "unknown" group turns out to be developers working on a volunteer basis - an unlikely result - then just over 1/3 of the 2.6.20 patch stream was written by volunteers. The real number will be lower, but it still shows that a significant portion of the code we run is written by developers who are donating their time.

Here is the full list:

 

Top changeset contributors by employer
(Unknown) 1244 25.0%
Red Hat 636 12.8%
(None) 383 7.7%
IBM 368 7.4%
Novell 295 5.9%
Linux Foundation 261 5.2%
Intel 178 3.6%
Oracle 126 2.5%
Google 97 1.9%
University of Aberdeen 79 1.6%
HP 78 1.6%
Qumranet 71 1.4%
Nokia 67 1.3%
SGI 64 1.3%
Astaro 63 1.3%
MIPS Technologies 61 1.2%
SANPeople 53 1.1%
Miracle Linux 43 0.9%
MontaVista 41 0.8%
Broadcom 39 0.8%

Re:

[B|nky (35330)]

Yes I did read the article. Which is why I thought SydShamino would find it of interest. With respect to your perspective, of the confirmed contributors, the only group that exceeds the non paid contributed (volunteers) is Red Hat. That shows, that with the confirmed group, the volunteers are very significant. While I also agree that you cannot blindly lump the "unknowns" into the "none" group, I suspect that of the "unknowns" the largest percentage would go to the volunteers. This would, very likely, place

Re:

[fossa (212602)]

The LinuxFund does not fund Linux; it funds various Linux-related Free and Open Source software projects as mentioned in the summary...

Re:

[rucs_hack (784150)]

Open source does rely heavily on people working for no pay, but any project that is elevated to the point of being important to business tends to get to the size where people need to devote a lot more time, and they need cash.

Reduced funding wouldn't kill open source, but it would hamper the motion of applications into the prime time.

They should switch to Discover Card

[by Anonymous Coward]

You can stop laughing now.

Fry tries to make a purchase in the future:

"Here's my Visa Card."

"Visa hasn't existed in over 400 years."

"Well, how about my MasterCard?"

"MasterCard hasn't existed in over 500 years."

"I have my Discover card."

(Pause) "Ooh, I'm sorry, we don't take Discover."

BoA again?

[zippthorne (748122)]

So.. they made this decision right about the same time they decided to accounts and loans to illegal immigrants? Interesting...

Credit card companies

[Cyphertube (62291)]

In my experience, MBNA / Bank of America have not been that great for credit cards. I used to get a ton of crap from MBNA, and I can be pretty sure those people have infested BoA's credit division.

My best suggestion would be to work with HSBC. A properly set up programme with them would possibly enable same/similar card services globally. I've had no problems with HSBC's customer service, aside from the occasional glitch in a VoIP connection to a call centre.

Otherwise, I've had pretty good experience with GE Money Bank and Citibank (as far as credit cards go). Chase, though, I avoid like the plague. So, if LinuxFund gets a Chase card, well, forget me then.

Re:Credit card companies

[Belial6 (794905)]

Chase made my list of 'never do business with them' companies when my credit card account with them was getting fraudulent charges from someone inside Chase, and they refused to do anything about it. When I called their fraud account services, all I would get was "There is no way that could happen.", "I highly doubt that.", and "That is a pretty serious accusation." Here are some of the reasons I believe it was an inside job:

1) I found out about the charge when I went to use the card and it was 'locked' due to suspected fraudulent activity. The only charge that was with a new company was a $30 charge to a dating service. This hardly seemed like a suspicious enough activity to block an account without first contacting the account holder.

2) More charges were made AFTER the account was locked. If I cannot make charges with the card, it is highly suspicious that someone else can.

3) When they sent me a new card with a new number, charges showed up from before before the card was created and the account number was assigned.

4) When I called Chase to point this out, they sent another card, and locked me out of being able to see the second cards charges online, even though I could still see the first card, and any previous cards I had held with Chase. 5) By the third card, the dates on some of the fraudulent Charges had changed.

Given that some of the problem would have actually required access to Chases computers to make happen, it was clear that it was an internal problem. I understand that there is no way for a company to guarantee that every one of it's employees is honest, but when they lie to me badly to cover up an internal problem instead investigating an fixing it, it is time to take your business elsewhere.

And, most importantly, if they are going to lie to me, they should at least have the decency to tell a half decent lie.

Re:

[Demona (7994)]

Chase are a bunch of goddamn lying thieves who claimed we always sent our mortgage payments late and tried to make us pay late fees. Lo and behold, when we started sending the payments by certified mail, suddenly like a miracle, they started receiving them on time. Go figure.

Re:

[couchslug (175151)]

What ever bank is used, a Slashdot affinity card would have a much bigger potential customer base along with more visibility than any other OSS-promoting activity.

Re:

[Cyphertube (62291)]

I'm sorry to hear that you've had a bad experience.

HSBC is not simply a British bank, no more than Citibank is an American bank. Both operate globally, and thus call centres may be located anywhere. Last time I checked, globally, collections people are often obnoxious and arrogant.

The way to get a corporation to stop calling is as follows (for future reference, and so you don't have to block numbers).

1. Don't say that someone they are trying to reach is unknown. Depending on the culture and the knowledge t

Funding for minor projects?

[fossa (212602)]

I always liked the old LinuxFund's mission of giving many small grants to many small projects. Are there any other similar organizations that do that sort of thing? Google Summer of Code comes to mind, but that is limited to college students. There's always the Paypal links on project homepages or Sourceforge, but I wish there was something more visible.

LinuxFund's current "give a constant source of funding to some projects" is nice too, and donating to the LinuxFund will hopefully remain a convenient way to donate to a number of individual projects.

I am currently a LinuxFund card holder, and was disappointed when Bank of America bought out MBNA. I'll be switching to the card my credit union offers very soon.

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

Maybe I missed something, but what is the "Linux Fund" doing giving money to Wikipedia (== Linux how?) and OpenSSH (== BSD licensed)?

Re:

[Rakishi (759894)]

I'm assuming Wikipedia runs on Linux and other GPL software and it's content is GPL licensed if I remember. OpenSSH is present on most linux systems I assume and the BSD license is GPL compatible and all that.

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

"I'm assuming Wikipedia runs on Linux and other GPL software and it's content is GPL licensed if I remember. OpenSSH is present on most linux systems I assume and the BSD license is GPL compatible and all that."

If it were the "GPL fund", or the "Open source fund", it would have been a different matter. OpenSSH is important for Linux, but it isn't Linux... Should Intel get money from the "Linux fund" because their processors can run Linux?

Wikipedia uses the "GNU Free Documentation License". Google uses Linux

Re:

[Rakishi (759894)]

By that logic Debian and Gentoo aren't linux either as they simply use the kernel in a another project. Hell, nothing short of the kernel itself would count if you want to be pedantic enough. So if you accept Debian and Gentoo then its pretty idiotic to nto accept OpenSSH by the same logic, actually the later is more important to linux as a whole than the former two.

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

"So if you accept Debian and Gentoo then its pretty idiotic to nto accept OpenSSH by the same logic, actually the later is more important to linux as a whole than the former two."

The card dons Tux the penguin, the Linux mascotte chosen by Linus himself, the linuxfund.org website has only one picture: The penguin. OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project.

That's the mismatch right there.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-230345.html [com.com]
http://www.openssh.org/ [openssh.org]

More important is debatable, OpenSSH is not the only ssh2

Re:

[fossa (212602)]

The LinuxFund was never strictly about Linux, but Free an Open Source Software projects [linuxfund.org]. I'm not sure I'd call Wikipedia a software project, but it is open source and does maintain the Mediawiki software.

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

"The LinuxFund was never strictly about Linux"

Then they should have used a different name and IMHO deserve their fate for abusing the trademark.

Re:

[fossa (212602)]

Perhaps, though it always was about the "Linux community", however one defines that. OpenSSH is certainly important to the Linux community. Wikipedia, not directly. I would support a name change for the fund; aside from Wikipedia, all the currently supported projects could be considered a part of the Linux community. In the end it's up to donors to understand to what they are donating; I'm not familiar with the terms of use of the Linux trademark, but maybe the LinuxFund's donations to the Linux Mark In

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

'Perhaps, though it always was about the "Linux community", however one defines that. OpenSSH is certainly important to the Linux community.'

The openssh.org website states on the front page "OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project."

Very similar, but different community...

Re:

[cduffy (652)]

The parent claimed that OpenSSH is important to the Linux community. Whether it's developed by the Linux community is hardly relevant to the accuracy of that claim.

I hold a LinuxFund card (and apparently missed the letter, because this is the first I've heard about them shutting down), and in no way consider donations to OpenBSD's OpenSSH development to be a misuse of funds.

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

Google is important to the Linux community too. So are Mozilla and Openoffice.org. Why should OpenSSH get stable long-term money from "The Linux Fund" but the others not?

The answer is probably that Google, Mozilla, and Openoffice.org have alternative sources for funding, and OpenSSH needs it more... Sure, they probably do. But OpenSSH should be getting it from the project they are part of: OpenBSD, which is a different community than the Linux community...

Or the "Linux Fund" should change their name to some

Re:

[cduffy (652)]

But OpenSSH should be getting it from the project they are part of: OpenBSD, which is a different community than the Linux community...

Huh?

LinuxFund isn't "a part of" the Linux community in any official way; rather, it's a nonprofit that advertised itself as an easy way to financially support what folks who are in the Linux community consider worthy causes by giving members the ability to vote on the direction of funds.

Sure, the BSD folks have their own subcommunity, but the larger free software/open source

Re:

[jelle (14827)]

"'LinuxFund isn't "a part of" the Linux community in any official way"

The Linux fund uses the Linux trademark and the penguin mascotte Tux, as the central word in its name, on the website, and on the card.

"rather, it's a nonprofit that advertised itself as an easy way to financially support what folks who are in the Linux community consider worthy causes by giving members the ability to vote on the direction of funds.'"

I have seen the 'Linux fund' credit card offers, and that that is not how it adversitses

I've had one for years

[by Anonymous Coward]

I've had one of these for years. I work for Microsoft. It's mildly amusing to pay for stuff in the company store with the cards (though I probably wouldn't do that if Balmer or Gates was behind me in line, not that it's likely to happen...).

(posting anonymoosely because, yes, I'm a coward... ;-) )

Oh come ON!

[Colin Smith (2679)]

Though I probably wouldn't do that if Balmer or Gates was behind me in line

You only live once!

 

Re:

[Splab (574204)]

I for one would want something different than killed by flying chair on my tombstone...

Re:

[Dunbal (464142)]

I probably wouldn't do that if Balmer or Gates was behind me in line

      You'd be safe so long as there weren't any chairs in the immediate vicinity! Bill would probably just offer to buy your card from you.

Re:

[Bruce Perens (3872)]

I used to go to Amsterdam to speak for HP. When I was there, I was always tempted to take a customer out to lunch, and go with him to one of the legal-there hashish clubs, and then file for reimbursement with HP :-) I never did it.

Bruce

B of A sucks

[DogDude (805747)]

Bank of America is is one of the worst commercial banks in the country, in my experience. Staying true to the OSS ideals, these guys really should look at getting a branded credit card from a non-profit credit union that serves its customers instead of the shareholders, anyway.

Re:

[HTMLSpinnr (531389)]

Agreed, BofA sucks.

However I've checked into my Credit Union's branded cards (past and present), and they're generally outsourced to the big banks such as MBNA (erm, BofA), HSBC, Elan Financial Services, or others. Their rates are also generally less attractive than some other big bank offerings. For instance, those who got the Linux Fund card some time ago under MBNA at the fixed 7.9% APR are less likely to switch to a variable 12.44%-17.99% card unless 4.5-10% of that interest is going to Linux Fund.

Re:

[StormShadw (686387)]

Personal credit cards have nothing to do with commercial banking - it's a consumer banking function. Cards like this (known as "affinity cards") are expensive to maintain unless you have a large credit portfolio, which is why many smaller banks don't bother... Unless you have a customer base large enough to provide an economy of scale, it just doesn't make sense.

Banks need to pay for the costs of maintaining their credit portfolio. (Think of it: cards need to be embossed, statement rendering, overhead in

I've got conflicting feelings

[cyphercell (843398)]

I thoroughly hate credit cards and love OSS, seems to be a conflict of theories somewhere.

Give something back?

[kaleco (801384)]

Perhaps it's time more OSS users show their appreciation by making donations. I definitely need to do this more. I imagine more generous donors also gain some clout for getting obscure bugs fixed or niche features added...

But I still have that great rate... for now

[HTMLSpinnr (531389)]

I too got one of these letters, and was disappointed that the Linux Fund program was dropped and converted to their lame "World Points" card. I've had 2 specialty cards that were previously MBNA (AOPA and Linux Fund), and both were changed somewhat with the BofA purchase. The AOPA card went from FBO rebates to double points @ FBO's, and now Linux Fund Card isn't supporting Linux and other F/OSS projects. Fortunately, for now, I still enjoy a 7.9% rate on the card which is the only reason I haven't canceled it (that and I enjoy the occasional remark on the Penguin logo on the card). When the card expires, I'll probably cancel it as there's no additional benefit and I hate the idea of letting BofA make money off of me.

If (or I should say when) BofA changes that single lasting benefit of having one of the lowest non-promotional non annual fee consumer credit card rates around, I'll drop the card. In the mean time, I too look forward to a new Linux Fund (or similar) branded CC from someone else, provided it has reasonable terms and rates.

Re:

[Dunbal (464142)]

(that and I enjoy the occasional remark on the Penguin logo on the card)

      Does it get you laid? :D

Re:

[HTMLSpinnr (531389)]

The hot chicks behind the Best Buy counter are usually the ones making the comments, but I'm married, so it's moot :-( (or at least that's what I tell my wife).

That cute penguin

[Bruce Perens (3872)]

It really works! Women at cash registers always smile at the cute penguin! And comment about it. And of course I've been out of that market for the past 16 years, too.

Bruce

Re:

[voidptr (609)]

Count me as one more that's pissed from BoA changing the rules on the AOPA card.

Picture

[belg4mit (152620)]

What about a picture of said card??

Re:

[Dunbal (464142)]

Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

Re:

[RobertLTux (260313)]

Chase had a nasty habit of counting early payments as late for the previous billing cycle.
--
im not sure that would even be remotely legal if a payment was tendered for that month ie starting with a current account
pay in april for april
pay in april for may
pay in may for june
should get you some sort of reward not an extra fee

Re:

[Proudrooster (580120)]

"Nobody is "illegal", fascist."

I didn't write the laws. We either enforce the laws or change them, but not ignore them. 98% of all illegal entries into the USA are unprosecuted and mostly "catch and release". We are a nation of laws and "the useless laws weaken the necessary one."

The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration. In any case, Yes, BOA is giving credit cards to people violating US law by being here illegally.

Re:

[bug1 (96678)]

"Yes, BOA is giving credit cards to people violating US law by being here illegally."

Thats better, its (in)action, not existence that is legal/illegal.