Without wishing to knock Kickstarter, which has provided a platform for plenty of great projects, it's fascinating that people are now willing to pay good money for an icon and a statement of intent (otherwise known as vapourware).

Given your response, you might be surprised at the number of angel (or even Series A) investments made almost exclusively on the basis of the individuals involved, sans any tangible product or traction.

The thing that holds Kickstarter projects together is putting one's own credibility on the line. The people who pledge, understand that it would not be worth me publicly destroying my reputation for $2000. And since I haven't solicited pledges above $64, I would argue that I'm taking on a much greater risk than any individual contributor.

I view Kickstarter primarily as a tool for customer discovery, to gauge whether a project is worth my time. It has the added benefit of building momentum behind the project by creating a small army of people who are, quite literally, invested in it.

There are probably other names for this process, but I like to call it IDD: icon-driven development.

Are you the developer?

At the very least, if this crashes and burns, there’s some more cocoa code out there for interacting with git in a GUI.

I’ve worked in academia, and there’s a name for getting funding based on promises of future results: grants.