Comment by vlovich123
4 hours ago
> Half the kernel is still built by individuals: people using gmail.com, personal domains, or university emails. The "corporate takeover" narrative is overstated. Companies contribute heavily, but the kernel remains a genuinely collaborative project.
Isn't the assumption here flawed? Someone may be employed by a corporation but still use their gmail/personal domain/university domain. This needs to be cross-correlated against some secondary source of employment data to give a more accurate picture.
I am a bit confused though here - should the kernel be written by unemployed people? Most contributors won’t have full-time funding.
That's an assumption in the exact opposite direction. GP is assuming that if someone commits while employed by a company then that company paid completely for that commit, while you're assuming that in that case the company "probably" didn't pay for the whole commit.
Either way, the article's conclusion seems to be insufficiently supported.