It should be socially acceptable for open source programs to offer the deal: we’ll consider patches from your engineers, but in exchange you have to chip in enough to support one of ours (to keep working on stuff we find interesting), and a little bit more (need some engineer-hours to review your patches).
It sounds quite biased in favor of the project at first, but if the project is popular, the company could get quite a bit out of it.
I think the ability to learn computer vision from scratch (and free) like I did is one of the best aspects of open source generally.
But yeah, an Arduino would be tough.
He has just been raving to me about how great OpenCV is. I know he's been using ChatGPT4 to give him C drivers for his custom rigs.
Like I said, he's a hardware geek, and actively hates coding, so I'm not exactly sure what he's been doing.
I will say that his drones and RC vehicles work a treat. I drive them around, occasionally.
From memory (heh) they come with 1Mb and you can add another 8 or 16...
It's a 600Mhz ARM M7 also, you can do a fair bit or work with that.
I agree that projects like OpenCV should be better-supported.
There are a couple of issues, though, that always crop up, when talking about supporting open projects:
1) I don't know of any corporation, anywhere, that actually donates for no reason at all. There's always a hook. Sometimes, it's just brand-building (logo on the free swag stuff), sometimes, it's to attract future employees (for instance, donating to a project that is maintained by a certain set of students from a college curriculum, etc.), sometimes, it's to influence "hearts and minds," and sometimes, it's a pure investment. They need a self-interested reason.
2) I don't know of any corporation, anywhere, that donates, with no expectation of influence. That's one reason why lobbying is such a big deal. There's a fig leaf of "no quid pro quo," but everyone knows that the donator is expecting a return.
3) I don't know if anyone has noticed (</s>), but the corporate environment tends to be, just a bit, on the competitive side. I know many corporations may not be willing to donate to a cause that will serve their competitors, as well as themselves.
I think that foundations help. They can set up a "step and repeat" page, with donors, but keep the branding (and influence) off the actual donations.