I'd disagree on this one. From my admittedly anecdotal experience, all the people I know who are heavily self-taught (myself included) have participated more in open source. Most of these people are driven by a passion for software, rather than a need to sell something.
I doubt they run any of the GSOC decisions through any sort of business case analysis. $150,000 is tiddlywinks to a corporation that generates billions on a monthly tempo. Hand wavy good feels are plenty enough justification for that level of spending.
(That's a ball park estimate of how much it would cost to fund and administrate several projects)
Your premise that Google contains enough business incompetence in enough of the right places to fund a direct competitor explains why they have funded Mozilla in the past. It doesn't really offer much explanation as to why Google did not fund them this year.
Conversely, even the minimum business process of some VP looking at the list and saying, "We are not going to fund a competitor," Occam Razors this year's events.
I don't think anyone is claiming that they benefit from sponsoring non-competitors, only that they would suffer a disadvantage from funding a competitor, and that this MAY have weighed into their decision-making.
Google haven't supported a number of major projects this year (including some that they directly benefit from), it's not just Mozilla. One assumes, therefore, that the GSoC management decided that GSoC should support more smaller projects this year.
EDIT: If Google only wanted to fund things that directly benefit them, you'd've thought they'd do just that, none of this faffing about with an application process and only funding student work, no?
Well, the assumption that I'm perpetuating it is on them then. I could have said "why don't you setup a git repo", but then again the easiest way of doing this would be via Github - which is a low barrier to entry.
Or they could use any of the other git repo hosting services out there. But, in my experience, GitHub is the easiest to use. A bit silly to downvote for that reason though, if that's the case.
I don't think Github is evil (yet). The fast and easy way to delete an account there is too transparent. They don't have also a strong competitor, neither weak points to be explored by a new player. We'll enjoy the status quo for some time: Google, Facebook, Microsoft all gave in to Github.
Not allowing custom images, not allowing certain formats, not allowing the use of a URL (which Glance then d/l and manages), not allowing uploading and simply not configuring the endpoints to be advertised AT ALL.