Conceptually, trust suggests we don't need to question, or exercise due diligence. I'd argue, in a capitalist system, you definitely shouldn't trust anyone! Capitalism is based on incentive.
--
So following on from this. Is the crux of these arguments anti-capitalist?
No .. it's not anti-capitalism. It's realistic. Even more realistic if you believe in a capitalism system and want to compete.
I feel that capitalism works most successfully when it provides more people with a better quality of life.
Fundamentally, there are conceptual problems with a capitalist system .. factors that lead to scenarios that are likely to lead to the system operating sub-optimally.
An example of a problem; if a corporation is allowed to grow without limit, how can new companies realistically compete?
The remedy? I guess it's up for discussion. But I think regulation can prevent the worst form occurring, and many markets have measures in place to carry out this type of regulation.
--
Why am I saying this?
Because I feel that open-source is simply a remedy to a conceptual problem that exists within our capitalist economy. It is not antithetical to capitalism.
Namely, the question it serves to answer is; how do we balance the power provided by digital technologies with the incentive companies have to exploit these powers for commercial gain?
Open-source is a logical answer to this. You could argue, we don't have the tools available to highlight any injustices contained in a code-base. My answer would be .. that doesn't mean we conceptually couldn't or won't in the future.
Closed source is a conceptual dead end - and won't lead to a better future.
--
So following on from this. Is the crux of these arguments anti-capitalist?
No .. it's not anti-capitalism. It's realistic. Even more realistic if you believe in a capitalism system and want to compete.
I feel that capitalism works most successfully when it provides more people with a better quality of life.
Fundamentally, there are conceptual problems with a capitalist system .. factors that lead to scenarios that are likely to lead to the system operating sub-optimally.
An example of a problem; if a corporation is allowed to grow without limit, how can new companies realistically compete?
The remedy? I guess it's up for discussion. But I think regulation can prevent the worst form occurring, and many markets have measures in place to carry out this type of regulation.
--
Why am I saying this?
Because I feel that open-source is simply a remedy to a conceptual problem that exists within our capitalist economy. It is not antithetical to capitalism.
Namely, the question it serves to answer is; how do we balance the power provided by digital technologies with the incentive companies have to exploit these powers for commercial gain?
Open-source is a logical answer to this. You could argue, we don't have the tools available to highlight any injustices contained in a code-base. My answer would be .. that doesn't mean we conceptually couldn't or won't in the future.
Closed source is a conceptual dead end - and won't lead to a better future.