685
US cuts funding to F-Droid, Tor Browser, Let's Encrypt and Tails Linux
(videos.abnormalbeings.space)
Oh No ! Leopards Ate My Face.
Better off in the long run.
this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
685 points (99.1% liked)
Open Source
36971 readers
224 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 16 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
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.
@MalReynolds Are you saying F-Droid, TOR, Tails or Let's Encrypt supported Trump? I'd like to read more about that.
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 Leopards eating faces implies that they voted for the Leopards. But ok, issue clarified, all good.
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Uhh.. these projects are the backbone of the free and modern web. How is less funding a good thing?
Not a good thing, just an inevitable one, as they conflict with the interests of the US (oligarchs and techbros).
Not sure if this is meant here, but shockingly many people believe that "funding" something equals to "controlling" it.
many people believe that “funding” something equals to “controlling” it.
Pretty much the definition of soft power, which an awful lot of politicians believe in.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
No. UN and related independent NGOs have shown their cards. They cannot be trusted. ICANN is the quintessential example of an ossified vulturous bureaucracy laser focused on oligarchic control. And the ITU has designs to rewrite current Internet protocols to have a fee structure built in at the packet level to ensure no packed flow without someone paying money.
We cannot trust the systems we have now. We must focus on diversifying income sources for us to be safe
Isn't the OTF already an NGO that can receive funding from different sources?
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)