retroactive grants are cool but they require builders take on all the risk (build it and you *might* get *some* funding)

an alternative ✨proactive✨ approach:

Do you see this as a viable model for public goods given that you have to charge people for usage? Aren’t those the kinds of projects that get most of the retroactive grants?

Founder @withBackdrop, enabling more digital painters, gardeners, and explorers

does something have to be free in order to be considered a public good? if so, then no, i don’t think this approach is a good match for that use case. more for helping to distribute startup risk (and reward) between creator and consumer