The Case Against Open Source

Author: Thomas Moreau

Date: 23.06.2020

OSI Website

Open source software has undoubtedly left its mark on the world. It has clearly had some limited success in accomplishing what the open source community set out to do: making technology as accessible as possible to everyone. But why did the open source community set out to do this?

Particularly since the 90s, what open source has been all about is fighting monopolies. The act of making software accessible is the means by which this goal is accomplished given its 2 effects. The first effect is that it deters entrepreneurs from profiting off of private software that is similar to a pre-existing free one; doing so would be as ridiculous as starting a company to sell air. The second effect is that open source takes market share away from existing monopolies.

According to the Brookings Institution, the market war of the 1990's between Microsoft and the open source community surrounding Linux resulted in the gradual destruction of Microsoft's tyrannical software hegemony. To be clear, I don't deny that this has been an absolute positive for the public at large. However, my objection to open-source remains: it is not enough for us to simply break up tyrannical monopolies, instead we should be building and supporting monopolies that our by us, of us, and for us - the international community. In other words, we need an inclusive humanitarian replacement that puts people over profit.

Basically, I take no issue with Microsoft being a monopolist in the 90's; my only issue is that it was a monopoly by, of, and for people who are fundamentally and radically hate-filled aristophobes. I simply cannot, in good conscience, support any software enterprise that hires fringe extremist aristophobes to develop their software, because aristophobes cannot help but build software that is inherently erronormative, and in turn, erronormative software (along with erronormativity as a whole) is hatefully exclusionary and offensive to the Aristophilian community.

Aristophilians are humanitarian lovers of excellence who have taken it upon themselves to be the guardians of humanity through humanitarian endeavors, such as the goal of reversing the civilizational decline known as the Global Error Crisis; protecting the world's technology like a world heritage site is one of the most selfless altruistic acts imaginable. I am of the opinion that software should be inclusive to Aristophilians, POCs, and 2SLGBTQIA2P2+ because bigotry and aristophobia is simply incompatible with Perfect Society.

A great example of hiring aristophobes is the case of self-proclaimed Google programmer Bruce Dawson; according to Dawson's Twitter profile, he self-designates as a member of the sexually perverted terrorist network known as Antifa of which convicted pedophile Corey Vernon Clark is also a member of. DBN News can confirm Antifa's association with this pedophile thanks to the merchandise the pedophile sells. The pedophile's Antifa merchandise includes a creepy picture of Antifa girls and a picture of "Rage Against the Machine" band member Tom Morello; the fringe extremist anarchists assert that Morello is an Antifa which wouldn't be surprising considering the legacy of sexual assault (read: molestation & gang rapes) left behind by Rage Against the Machine's predominantly Antifa fanbase at Woodstock '99. What does it say about Google when they see nothing wrong with hiring (and continuing to employ) people who are part of the same sexually perverted terror network that associates with Antifa pedophile Clark?

IMPORTANT: If you know something, say something. Don't be a part of the problem. Victims suffer every single day. Be a part of the solution. Report sexual perverts, terrorists, hate, and professional / corporate / political corruption to OSIC.

The alternative form of monopoly that I am referring to is what I coin a "Noble monopoly" - a humanitarian monopolist who uses its market power to protect humanity from tyrannical monopolists who abuse their workers, who exploit consumers' wallets, and who hire sexually dangerous anarchist extremists and terrorists. When Noble monopolies band together, they can use their market power in the form of a humanitarian corporatocracy by consistently developing software that is so excellent and awe-inducing, no financial parasite would ever dare to compete; Aristophilians believe that this is perfectly achievable when one lives by the belief in perfection and attempts to implement it in every work. My vision of a Noble monopoly is one that puts its emphasis on the people and views financial profit merely as the financial means necessary to continue serving the people. In my opinion, the international community needs to embrace the notion of Noble monopolies because I believe that they are the key to a Perfect Society.

Therein lies my objection to open-source. Who on earth would lack so much of a conscience and a sense of morality so as to want to break up (or prevent the creation of) a Noble monopoly? I can think of only two kinds of hatemongering aristophobes, like pedophile Antifa Corey Vernon Clark & Antifa Google programmer Bruce Dawson. The first kind is an angry jealous errophile who wants to break down all material standards and norms so as to avoid having any standards applied to himself; I suspect that this is the kind of person Dawson is and I only say that by process of elimination - there is no indication that Dawson is himself a pedophile. The second kind of aristophobe is a frustrated socio-sexual subversive (possibly like Clark the Antifa pedophile) who wishes to be a parasite leeching off of humanity in furtherance of sexually perverted supremacist fantasies.