OPENSATS SHIPPING OVER A MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF BITCOIN EVERY MONTH TO OPEN SOURCE CONTRIBUTORS.
I THINK WE CAN GO BIGGER.
Login to reply
Replies (16)
Bullish
VERY COOL AND GENEROUS. THANK YOU SIR FOR ALL Y'ALL DO. 🙏
Interesting to watch how nation state insertion to bitcoin and how the creators of the network have always resisted such isolated network ideals. Open source contribution creates a new paradigm of innovation in a digital sphere. Open capital without borders is the financial incentive of a global and open knowledge to flourish. Knowledge wants to be free.
Maybe a million Bitcoin a month?
Congratulations Matt ,
@npub10pen...n34f $1M/month in funding is a huge win for Bitcoin & OpenSource! But the community needs more clarity.
is a start, but lacks specific grant amounts. We see ~50 recipients. Is the average grant ~$20k/month?
My @WalletScrutiny application (and others) received no response.
@Peter Todd's situation
also raises questions but he at least got a rejection.
Given OpenSats' influence, greater transparency is crucial for trust.
OpenSats
Transparency - OpenSats
OpenSats' transparency and policy documents.
Heh, I applied for a $20k grant to do a proper analysis of Nostr's decentralization on Saturday. Same idea (and similar cost) as my recent L2 Covenants article. Only took them one business day to reject it (took them 6 weeks to reject my grant request to keep OpenTimestamps running).
I'm not surprised. I strongly suspect there isn't much good to say about Nostr's decentralization and I hear OpenSats is funding a bunch of Nostr. Nostr needs a serious redesign.
View quoted note →
LET THAT SINK IN SIR 🫡💜
OSAID > USAID
step by step building nostr
> WE HAVE HAD OVER 1000 APPLICATIONS. THAT MEANS OVER 800 REJECTIONS.
This implies you accepted 200 applications? Where is WalletScrutiny? Did you get that application? Do you count it as rejected? If so, could I have a rejection message, please?
> WE ARE ONE OF THE MOST TRANSPARENT AND EFFICIENT NON PROFITS IN THE WORLD.
Nah, I don't think so. That reminds me how out of the thousands of wallets I personally reviewed, most marketing claims include some variation of "best wallet". It's so universally present that it doesn't even serve as a red flag, although the best wallets tend to use that phrase less than the shadier ones.
> WE DO NEED TO GET BETTER AT COMMS/FEEDBACK. IT IS A PRIORITY.
Since when is it a priority, cause I'm trying to get feedback since months for an application I sent many months ago.
WE SENT YOU A REJECTION EMAIL ON OCT 17.
💯
I'm not bending the political knee to a centralized institution.
I’m always a fan of knowing how much someone is funded. For the accountability of the grantee + helps people understand the priorities of the org from a fiscal scene. MacArthur does it, Fords database is updated routinely, and jacks start small has it too. All that said, I’ve never seen so many grown men whine openly grant declinations here/feel entitled to have a grant in my life.
OpenSats distributes ~$1M monthly in Bitcoin/nostr funding while seeking more donations, yet lacks transparency in their grant decisions. Their board includes a non-FOSS hardware wallet producer, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest in funding decisions, particularly for Free and Open Source hardware wallet projects. While @npub17tyk...3mgl (who can be seen as a ColdCard competitor) received support, the total amount relative to overall distributions remains unclear. While "Free and Open Source" is a requirement for OpenSats grants, multiple board members are known to block people who question their compliance with OSI standards of FOSS. The community deserves to know: How are votes handled when board members have industry ties? What prevents personal dynamics from affecting grant decisions for important FOSS projects like WalletScrutiny?
tldr, b