What are your thoughts? Any counter-counter points to the author’s response to most concerns regarding open source?
Especially in public life (government, etc), open source should be a default. The only exception I can think of is where there is no open source project serving a need but a proprietary one does.
But we need to go further than open source and practice ethical technology. If there is overlap between open source and evils like fascism and genocide*, then we are fostering an “open source” practice that serves the privileged.
*Microsoft, Google, etc
The biggest growing concern is that many open-source projects are maintained by just 1-2 people, who themselves become targets of capitalists trying to take down such competitors by hacking their accounts. Even GitHub is no longer safe; I now download 2-3 versions away from the latest version of each project and read up on clamor first, just in case.
I don’t disagree. I believe if public/government funds are used to develop software, that software should be open source. Same with many of the developments paid for by the government… If we the people are paying for it, it should be open