Big companies often take open code, build closed products, and profit — leaving maintainers to fund and support the project alone. The Redis situation is just one example.
We propose a fair model: if you fork the code, close the source, and make serious money from it, part of those profits should go back into the original project.
This only kicks in when value is extracted privately — unlike BSL or Fair License, which block usage entirely. Our goal isn’t to restrict, but to sustain.
And how can fediverse survive, and how can it pay for servers? Who among the professionals will do this? If you leave this system only for enthusiasts, then you can leave everything as it is and improve only the code. And if you want to overthrow the monopoly without violence, then the authors will need monetization tools and not necessarily advertising . Linux would not have become so popular without redhat and other commercial companies. P. S I myself really like everything free and use only open source software, give donates periodically to the authors.
It seems to me that the main reason for unpopularity, in addition to the lack of advertising, is monetization.
How can I recoup my production of content that can be expensive? It seems to me that a competent symbiosis of fediverse and cryptocurrency is the real web3.
We decided on a multi-cloud infrastructure. Now the team is thinking about choosing a tool that would allow you to migrate and do multi-cloud in two clicks. We try to go to not very large clouds, because first we want to support small businesses, and secondly, sometimes it is more convenient for regional legislation. The main clouds are Scaleway, DigitalOcean and your own servers.
There is a skills repository describing APIs (schemas, auth, constraints); any model can download skills it needs;
A tiny binary executes the actual API calls based on those skills.
If an API has a skill, the model can use it — same interface, same flow. Works equally well for local models and hosted ones.