Closed vs. Open Source: A Pivotal Battle Shaping the Future of Technology
TL:DR
- The booming digital economy’s speed owes much to dominant closed tech platforms, but worries emerge due to their opaque operations and arbitrary choices.
- Open-source projects like Bitcoin, Nostr and CalyxOS, embody transparency and community involvement, fostering decentralization and innovation, promoting trust, and providing users with more control over their digital experiences and data.
- Embracing open-source solutions can shape a more equitable and secure digital future, as it allows users to reclaim agency and contribute to technology development.
Over the last few decades, the digital economy has witnessed rapid growth driven by influential technology platforms. However, a significant concern has emerged in this era of technological advancement. These platforms, created and controlled by massive corporations, operate as closed systems that keep their inner workings hidden from the public.
Setting the Field for Battle
In the rapidly advancing landscape of today’s technological frontier, the dichotomy between closed and open-source technology is casting a transformative influence over the trajectory of our digital future.
This clash is not merely about code and development methodologies; it encompasses broader societal and ethical considerations. As technology increasingly permeates every facet of our lives, the truth is that the choices we make between closed and open approaches have far-reaching implications for transparency, control, and privacy.
However, a more distressing issue looms large — the intricate collaboration between tech companies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and sovereign governments, resulting in the sweeping realm of mass surveillance.
Compelling data from Pew Research Center underscores these worries, indicating that 81% of Americans believe the potential drawbacks of companies gathering their data outweigh any advantages, while 66% share a similar sentiment regarding government data collection.
As we approach this pivotal juncture, it becomes imperative to emphasize the significance of closed and open-source technology.
In real open source, you have the right to control your own destiny. — Linus Torvalds
Closed vs. Open-Source: What’s the Difference?
Closed-source technology involves proprietary software developed and owned by enterprises with restricted access to the underlying source code. This lack of transparency makes it challenging to comprehend the inner workings of the technology or validate its security and privacy features.
Such technologies are frequently termed “walled gardens,” wherein your capabilities are severely restricted, and the ability to transfer your content and audience to other platforms remains unavailable.
In contrast, open-source technology embraces a collaborative approach, making the source code freely accessible for inspection, modification, and distribution. This transparency empowers individuals to control their digital experiences, fostering innovation, trust, and accountability.
The Downside of Closed-Source Technology
Although we discuss this topic in depth in, “What Are Walled Gardens? Understanding Their Significance and Impact”, it’s worth rehashing some downsides of proprietary software:
- Lack of Transparency & Security
- Exploitative Practices
- Collaboration Between Entities of Concern
Lack of Transparency & Security
The closed nature of proprietary technology puts users at the mercy of the corporations that control it. Without access to the inner workings, users cannot truly understand how their data is handled, raising concerns about privacy and security.
Not to mention that, in addition to these entities collecting large amounts of data about their user base outside of what’s necessary, they are storing this data in vulnerable databases that create ‘honeypots’ that are at risk of leaking the personal data of millions, if not billions, of people.
Let us forget the Equifax data breach that allowed malevolent actors to come into possession of >147M Americans’ confidential information, like full names, addresses, emails, and even social security numbers. We now know this information has been sold on the dark web to actors with unknown intentions.
As Pamela Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, a nonprofit research group put it, “This is about as bad as it gets”.
Exploitative Practices
Closed-source platforms often prioritize profit over the well-being of users. They can employ manipulative tactics, collect excessive user data, and engage in practices that exploit personal information for targeted advertising or other financial gains. It’s also become more well-known that most, if not all, apps and platforms leverage techniques that tap into our very human nature by triggering dopamine spikes that keep us engaged [and addicted] to their platforms.
As Ex-Google, Tristan Harris, lambasted on 60 Minutes in 2017, Instagram employs a technique called variable-ratio reward scheduling. This means that the notifications you get for “likes” on your photos might not always come immediately. Sometimes, you might notice fewer responses than you hoped for when you first make a post. However, later on, you’ll likely receive those “likes” in a larger batch. This interesting pattern sets up your brain’s dopamine centers to react strongly to the sudden surge of social approval, especially after the initial moments of disappointment.
Although not strictly unethical, these methods for hacking human psychology for engagement have become a contentious topic.
Lastly, since the advent of social media around 2010, a concerning trend has emerged, notably affecting the mental health landscape. Research has unveiled a stark correlation between the rise of digital connectivity and an increase in depression and anxiety rates. Among Gen Z, a demographic that has grown up immersed in the world of online interactions, there has been a staggering 92% surge in anxiety levels since 2010. The emergence of this connection between the digital age and mental well-being prompts us to critically examine the complex interplay between technology, societal norms, and psychological health.
“There isn’t a bright line between addicts and the rest of us. We’re all one product or experience away from developing our own addictions.”
― Adam Alter, Irresistible: The Rise of Addictive Technology and the Business of Keeping Us Hooked
Collaboration Between Entities of Concern
The emergence of Public-Private partnerships involving corporations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and governments has prompted valid ethical inquiries regarding the potential implications of mass surveillance and narrative control on the general population.
While these collaborations are often established with constructive intentions, they can inadvertently erode privacy rights and infringe upon the personal freedoms of individuals. It’s important to recognize that the complexities surrounding such partnerships warrant careful examination to strike a balance between collective progress and safeguarding individual rights.
Before immediately dismissing the possibility, it’s essential to note that numerous American companies, including Google, have previously engaged in actions that raise eyebrows. For instance, they’ve acquiesced to certain regimes, such as China, implementing content restrictions mandated by the government.
In a more recent instance, Twitter (now X.com) intentionally restricted user access to content based on requests from then-Presidential candidate, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, a move that took place during one of the most fiercely contested elections in history.
It’s worth remembering the extensive efforts undertaken by numerous prominent organizations to counteract ‘misinformation.’ However, these endeavors came at a considerable price, often resulting in people being removed from online platforms or even losing access to financial services (e.g. the Canadian Trucker protests).
Not to mention that trust in institutions has plummeted to unprecedented lows.
According to a recent Gallup poll, trust in institutions among Americans has been on the decline for the better part of the last 15 years. However, 2022 marked a new low in their confidence in key institutions. The findings reveal that most of the institutions monitored by Gallup are currently at historically low levels of trust. In fact, the average confidence across all these institutions has dropped by four points compared to the previous low.
However, as if by some divine creation, distrust in institutions is the one thing all three major political parties agree on
Why is Open-source Technology Growing?
The intriguing aspect of open source technology lies in its inherent presence within the internet’s DNA.
HTML. HTTPS. FTP. TCP/IP. These protocols formed the basis for constructing the considerably more intricate platforms that now play a crucial role in our everyday lives. However, as time progressed, entities established barriers that persisted.
Yet, just as the walls seemed unyielding and the future appeared fixed, around the early 2010s, a revitalized wave of open-source development emerged.
In our present era, prominent technologies like Bitcoin thrive on open-source principles and steadily gather momentum. The resurgence can be attributed to the following factors:
- Empowering Individuals
- Enhanced Security & Privacy
- Fosters Collaboration & Innovation
- Censorship Resistance
Empowering Individuals
Open-source software also undergoes rigorous peer review and scrutiny from a global community of developers. This collective effort exposes vulnerabilities, fosters quicker bug fixes, and ensures the technology is more resilient against cyber threats.
Individuals and enterprise alike can self-host many aspects of their tech stack, reducing reliance on trusted third parties.
Enhanced Security & Privacy
Open-source software also undergoes rigorous peer review and scrutiny from a global community of developers. This collective effort exposes vulnerabilities, fosters quicker bug fixes, and ensures the technology is more resilient against cyber threats.
Fosters Innovation & Collaboration
Without the guardrails of proprietary software, open-source technology stimulates innovation by democratizing access to technology. Developers worldwide can build upon existing solutions, leading to a diverse range of applications that are interoperable with each other, and leads to progress in various new domains and use cases.
Censorship Resistance
Most importantly, one of the driving factors behind the growing popularity of open-source technology is its inherent censorship resistance. In closed-source systems, centralized authorities hold the power to control and manipulate content the content you see and the platform that you stand on, leading to potential censorship and information manipulation.
In contrast, open-source solutions promote decentralization, where content and data are distributed across a network of participants. This decentralized nature makes it more difficult for any single entity to control or censor information, ensuring that individuals have the freedom to access and share content without interference.
By embracing open-source technology, users and communities can safeguard their ability to communicate freely, resist censorship attempts, and maintain an open exchange of information across the digital landscape. As the need for censorship resistance becomes increasingly apparent in today’s world, open-source solutions provide a critical avenue for preserving digital freedom and defending the right to express and access information without undue restrictions.
Use Cases: Most Notable Open-Source Technologies
Bitcoin, Not Blockchain
As popular as blockchains are these days, as a career data analyst, I find blockchains to be mundane in and of themselves. They are excessively large and redundant databases — suboptimal for complex computing requirements.
Apart from their considerable magnitude, blockchains hold little value unless the establishment of their immutable nature is ensured. As of yet, the proof of work consensus mechanism looks to be the only notable method for doing so but prove impractical or unnecessary for common tasks, like maintaining a ledger of sales or the tracking of shipping containers for a single company.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, maintains the independent ability to protect the historical record of all transactions, prevent double-spending, run on a mathematical emission schedule, and is resistant to confiscation through brute-force methods, using a combination of innovations. SHA-256 encryption, Proof of work (PoW) consensus, blockchain, Merkle trees, just to name a few.
In short, bitcoin is a tool that appeals to a broad spectrum of people, whether they be Afghani women who are legally not allowed to have a bank account, refugees fleeing authoritarian regimes but can’t take their live savings with them without potential confiscation or worse, or day traders trying to make a quick buck.
Bitcoin’s open-source nature enables trustless and decentralized consensus while also revolutionizing the idea of how digital technologies can serve billions of people, not just stakeholders.
Censorship Resistance & Secure Communications
Nostr, short for “Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays,” is a groundbreaking open protocol that empowers censorship-resistant, self-hosted and globally decentralized publishing on the web. Unlike traditional apps or services, Nostr is a simple, open standard that anyone can utilize as a foundation for their creations.
At its core, Nostr thrives on simplicity, employing flexible Event objects passed as plain JSON and leveraging standard public-key cryptography for keys and signing. This straightforward design allows for an easy implementation of relays and client applications, ensuring the protocol’s seamless scalability and future expansion.
The strength of Nostr lies in its resilience, as it doesn’t rely on a limited number of trusted servers. Instead, the protocol acknowledges that relays may come and go, empowering users to connect and publish to any number of relays that they can alter at will, allowing users to pick up their bags and leave to go elsewhere if they choose.
By adopting public-key cryptography for Nostr accounts, the verifiability of messages becomes effortless, ensuring that messages genuinely originate from the designated user. With its focus on simplicity, resilience, and verifiability, Nostr opens new possibilities for censorship-resistant and trustless value-for-value publishing on the global stage, transforming the way we interact and share content on the web.
Who needs a blue check anyway?
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)
Open-source frameworks like TensorFlow and PyTorch for AI and ML have made advanced technologies accessible to everyone, sparking innovation and enabling individuals and organizations to apply AI across various fields like healthcare, finance, and education.
Consider OpenAI’s ChatGPT as an example. As OpenAI expands its influence through awe-inspiring generative AI, global efforts are underway to develop technology that not only brings this AI to the masses but also allows them to retain control over the code and data inputs, eliminating the need for a central authority, such as OpenAI.
Initiatives like Llama 2 and Bloom are introducing Large Language Models (LLMs) to those eager to create their own generative AIs without the need for massive datacenters and computing power.
This isn’t just about safeguarding privacy; as malicious actors gain access to these technologies, it’s imperative for the rest of the world to stand strong in defending themselves.
Open Data and Data Science
The open-source movement even extends to data as well. Open data initiatives promote transparency, collaboration, and civic engagement, fostering innovation in fields such as data science, machine learning, and policy-making.
In a landscape dominated by closed ecosystems, the imperative lies in upholding an internet accessible worldwide that serves users, not impedes them. Prioritizing open standards for data science, analysis, and protocols becomes crucial to guarantee equitable access to data insights within our predominantly digitized world.
Whether through the utilization of Open Data licenses, the adoption of open-source data architecture, the implementation of open-source databases, or the utilization of data visualization tools, the fate of open-source tools becoming widespread rests upon the ability to gather, organize, analyze, and distribute the lifeblood of the digital economy — data.
Conclusion
The digital age presents a crucial battleground between closed and open-source technology.
Closed-source platforms tend to centralize power to strategically harness data and collaborate with entities that might jeopardize privacy and sovereignty. On the contrary, open-source solutions empower individuals and grant them the ability to manage their digital footprints while participating in advancing the technology.
Today, more than ever, open source technologies, like Bitcoin, LLaMa, and SHA-246 encryption, are increasingly being relied on by people around the globe to protect and empower them. By embracing open-source technologies, we open the door to reclaiming agency, fostering transparency, and nurturing innovation.
However, it’s important to remember that the effectiveness of these technologies relies on active participation from individuals with agency. Through their engagement, we can collectively shape a digital landscape that strives for equity, security, and progress.
