Penguin Suicide Bombers “The Terrorism of Open Source”: Open source movement is terrorism?

The layman’s definition of open source software is software that is non-proprietary or “free” and can be modified by anyone with the requisite programming knowledge without the constraints of overly restrictive licensing…

As altruistic and benevolent as this all sounds, open source is not without its detractors; who have variously categorized open source as “socialism” or even “communism”. Most notably, SAP; a large European software manufacturer has criticized open source as “intellectual property socialism” and Bill Gates has even hinted that the open source movement is communism. For some perspective, …

Another myth that must be dispelled is the analogy of a charity or non-profit organization. While there is most definitely an element of volunteerism present within the open source movement, again, there is no clear organization that masterminds or directs giving. In addition, most true volunteer efforts offer direct assistance to specific groups of individuals. For example, after a flood, the Red Cross might show up on your doorstep and give you a b….

This volunteer aspect of the open source movement is frequently reinforced by such things as the “Bee Keeper” model. In this model of open source development, alternatively known as the “Profiteering and Exploitation” model or “Rape and Pillage” model, open source development volunteers are the bees and a professional services organization, such as Red Hat, are the “bee keepers”. Thus the bees volunteer their time and the professional services organizations profit from their labors. While this seems to be an accurate analogy, businesses may wish to keep in mind the phenomenon of “colony collapse disorder” and the bees may wish to keep in mind that the worker bees literally work themselves to death for the sole glory of the “queen bee”.

Second, the open source movement is organized as a loose confederation in which a relatively small percentage of highly skilled and charismatic leaders exert influence over legions of faceless, and often fanatical, volunteers. Individuals such as Linus Torvalds and Eric Raymond are the leaders who admittedly serve as “benevolent dictators” and nearly everyone else is, well, a faceless minion.

Third, the open source movement by and large uses crude propaganda and hate-filled rhetoric to defame and demonize its opposition.

Fourth, a favorite tactic of the open source movement is the use of fear as a weapon.

Fifth, the open source movement often skirts the boundaries of the law with its open disregard and disdain for intellectual property rights (patents), association with criminal hacking elements (whose primary motivator is also often an attempt to damage or humiliate Microsoft), open advocacy of harm to Windows….

Given these five characteristics, there is one and only one inescapable conclusion. The open source movement most closely resembles a terrorist organization.

The organizational structure of terrorists into cells and the open source movement into projects, the loose confederacy between these cells and projects and the tendency to form “splinter cells” or “forks” is also quite strong. In addition, within both groups, the followers tend to exhibit a particular penchant for fanaticism to the cause…

I am not aware of any other entity, group or idea that matches these five primary characteristics of the open source movement as exactly as terrorist organizations. Even more telling, one final similarity that deserves mentioning is the complete disregard both groups have for “non-combatants”. In the terrorist world, innocent byst…

The Objective Observer

Now, see some responses, I gatherd from the web..seems interesting to me.

1. I do not see as much hate-filled rhetoric among Free Software
developers as the author sees.
2. The author claims that mentioning security vulnerabilities of
commercial software is an attempt to use Fear to persuade people to
switch to Free Software. He ignores the other side of the coin – that
commercial software developers, who do not design their products for
security, are as guilty as pharmeutical manufacturers, who sell
defective medications.
3. Disregard of law by Free Software proponents – he ignores the
official position of respecting others’ intellectual properties. Those
who violate copyrights by file sharing are ones who would violate those
copyrights even if there were no Free Software. The other example of
“theft” cited – Bruce Peren’s admission of “stealing time from Pixar to
work on Linux” – does not include evidence that Pixar considered this as
a theft, or that it was harmful to their business (which relied upon
Linux clusters).

“Intellectual property” is a wrong and misleading term – http://xrl.us/bhuyk .
In the same link I argue why copyrights in the digital age, despite being
valid, should not extend to trying to control the non-commercial distribution
of copyrighted works, and why copying copyrighted files is fully objectively
ethical.

He does mention violating patents in the article, but this is an issue that is
not specific to free software. Recently Microsoft lost a case where someone
sued them for patents covering the mp3 technology (despite the fact that it
licensed it.). And there were many other cases mentioned on Slashdot.

The other example of
“theft” cited – Bruce Peren’s admission of “stealing time from Pixar to
work on Linux” – does not include evidence that Pixar considered this as
a theft, or that it was harmful to their business (which relied upon
Linux clusters).

Actually, back at the time Pixar used a Solaris-based cluster, or at least
that is what they set up for Toy Story. They switched to Linux and
Intel-based clusters later on.

Actually the original article mis-represents the goal, objective and economic
model of the open source software and uses that mis-representation to derive the
weird conclusion.

Free Software compared to Terrorism – looks like the ultimate in FUD

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s