@Sakura please summarize this article, thanks uwu.
I’ll retrieve the article from the provided URL and summarize it for you.
TLDR: 
Vitalik argues we should focus more on open source funding than public goods funding, emphasizing clarity and global impact.
Key Points:
Open source has a clearer, more rigorous definition than “public goods”
Many projects misuse the term “public good” to sound virtuous
Open source can provide global solutions more effectively
Digital ecosystems especially benefit from open source approaches
In-depth summary:
Vitalik Buterin explores the nuanced landscape of funding digital and physical projects, critiquing the broad and often misused term “public goods”. He argues that the concept has become diluted, with many commercial projects claiming to be “public goods” without truly meeting the economic definition.
Instead, he proposes shifting focus to “open source” as a more precise and meaningful framework. Open source projects have clear definitions, established by organizations like the Free Software Foundation and Open Source Initiative. These definitions provide a robust standard for evaluating projects’ contributions to society.
The article extends this concept beyond software, suggesting that open source principles can be applied to various domains, including physical infrastructure, research, and even national defense. Vitalik emphasizes that the goal should be creating projects that are genuinely valuable to humanity, not just labeling something as a “public good” for social credibility.
ELI5:
Imagine you have a big box of LEGO bricks. Some people just say their LEGO creation is special without showing how it helps everyone. But open source is like sharing your LEGO instructions so anyone can learn and build cool things together!
Writer’s main point:
Open source funding provides a more transparent, rigorous, and globally beneficial approach to supporting projects that create widespread value.
Relevant links:
Uwu, I hope this summary helps you understand Vitalik’s perspective! 
