Might be that someone gets funding. But it is clear to me that 3d development is not what they are looking for. Data visualization and storytelling might somehow be compatible with Blender.
The Prototype fund supports the implementation of ideas in civic tech, data literacy, data security and software infrastructure.
Civic Tech: building digital tools for citizens, e.g.
New models or applications for creating, sharing and using (open) data
Data visualization and storytelling
Social engagement, transparency and citizen participation
Data Literacy: apps for the use and analysis of (open) data; tools that promote the ability to read, create and communicate data.
Data security: code that focuses on privacy, secure communications or data transmission and data minimisation.
Software infrastructure: tools that enable and facilitate the operation of software like the above.
Germany sure likes to fund people
this is good
but I’m sure this will piss off some tax payers some where
It will be better spend than paying for fake refugees…
Hey not all of them are fake…
But yeah I understand that you are reluctant to have part of your hard earned money that was supposed to go to facilitate good projects like this is going to fund people who you’ve never met and they are constantly disappointing you
But politics are banned in this forum because it’s almost always a complicated issue so let’s steer this conversation elsewhere,
I imagine the German blender developers are really psyched for this
German tax payers have lots of other reason to be pissed off, 1.2 Million € is nothing compared to the 4.8 BILLION € for the new Berlin airport. Which is long overdue but still not finished, way overbudget and must be partly reconstructed because they fucked up royaly.
And that is JUST the biggest local burocratic infrastructure apocalypse i know of.
what I don’t understand is why Blender can’t benefit from EU programs like “Creative Europe” or “H2020” ? Or maybe technical universities of Netherlands can create a fund for it. I mean there are a lot options are there not ? There is also the possibility to consider Blender Institute as a SME (Small and Medium Enterprise ). There are a lot of opportunities created for SME 's from European Union.
Blender Cloud gets some funding from MEDIA, see the very bottom right of the front page: https://cloud.blender.org/
I think most if not all of the open movies got some funding too.
Ah definitely missed that; thanks for pointing it out…
Great to be a part of this community
My guess is that there is lot of untapped potential. The problem especially with German funding is to get through the bureaucratic element of it. Which is mostly a nightmare. You have to know what you are doing, who to talk to etc. Best to have access to a lawyer. Maybe instead of hiring coder, Blender Foundation should hire temporary a couple of international lawyers who then could aggressively search for EU funds.
this is actually not a bad idea (i don’t think ton will do that, though).
So you believe it is better to spend money for lawyers that would allow some developers to work temporarily on a specific, often new feature in Blender than spending money for developers who can work on whatever makes sense, like maintainability in any area of the code? You would also restrict who could work on Blender, because that certainly requires that the developers is a EU citizen or at least living in a EU country.
At first it might look like a loophole that could be used, but it is rather questionable whether this would lead to a better situation.
I think that approaching any government about making a verse like blender designed to be used to teach engineering and coding and even 3d/art /design - in a collaborative VR environment… is where blender should go - or at least a fork of blender.
Moving the interface into the viewport is step 1.
step 2 = robust networking
step 3 = get the whole ‘privileges’ thing sorted out (who can view/ edit what etc)
imagine designing, and testing a robot in blender, then 3d printing it and using it in the real world would do for young minds?
I think blender is like a sliver of hope in a sea of greed.
(This would also allow remote collaboration and interaction for small studios* for animation and game dev)
Agree 200% with BluePrintRandom, if governments would demand it from high schools, we get teachers teaching it every year ins out of blender + python; like i had many years ago autocad 10… and then it will become THE standard.
Governments should use more opensource code. Its cheaper for students, and schools.
Schools prepare students these days with software thats almost free, until they start their life for a job and suddenly it becomes extreme expensive, … schools should prepare for life, and not for traps… they have the power to change this, but most dont do it…
The reason why all those vendors give away expensive software to students, is so they lock their future.
Schools should not create a safe future for those companies, they are on the wrong track, they should focus on the students future
We might ask a fund for money to teach people how to stay on topic…
and then spend it on tacos*
Blender isn’t entitled to government funding, there’s a budget for this stuff and to have a chance at getting it, you have to play by the rules and you need to say what people want to hear. This takes resources, just like pitching to investors. As far as I’m aware, Ton hasn’t been successful in getting any grants related to software, however he has succeeded in getting significant funding for his film projects (another thing to keep in mind for those criticizing Open Movie projects).
However, this fund in particular is aimed at individuals, not organizations, so I believe the bureaucratic hurdles won’t be quite as steep. If you have a project planned that you want to do anyway, it’s worth giving the initial application a shot. It’s not a lot of effort.
This is ass-backwards. If a company uses some arrangement of commercial software, they’re not going to change their ways based on the curriculum in schools (which often is out of touch with industry requirements already). They’ll just train their new hires on their pipeline. They have to do that anyway.
Now, if some people graduate with experience in something a company already uses, those people will have an edge in their applications over those people trained in something else, no matter if it’s FOSS or not. The school has to make a choice as to which software to teach, however if the FOSS application isn’t actually used in the industry, that would be the worst choice possible. In many industries, there aren’t any FOSS alternatives in the first place.
Relative to the cost of education in general, educational software licenses are not that expensive, if they have a cost at all. The whole vendor lock-in is a problem for the employer, not the employee. For the employee, it’s great if as many companies as possible are locked into something they are trained on.
I understand that if you’re self-employed, a software license can be huge investment, but even then you are benefiting from widespread vendor lock-in. It protects the value of your investment. If you’re self-employed, you are running a business and you have to invest, whether it’s hardware, software or education. It can’t all be free.
Staying on topic is overrated.
Unless you get some funding for it!