1. Free Software:
- "Free" in this context refers to freedom, not necessarily price. Free software grants users the freedom to run, modify, and share the software. The key principles of free software are often summarized by the Four Freedoms:
- Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose.
- Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works and change it to make it do what you wish (access to the source code is a precondition for this).
- Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others.
- Freedom 3: The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others. By doing this, you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes.
2. Open Source Software:
- Open source software is similar to free software, but the focus is more on the collaborative benefits of making the source code available. The term "open source" emphasizes that the source code is open and accessible to anyone. Users can modify the software and distribute their modified versions.
- Open source projects often involve collaboration among developers from all over the world, contributing to the software's development, bug fixes, and new features.
Examples of FOSS:
- Linux: An open-source operating system kernel that is the basis for many operating systems (e.g., Ubuntu, Debian).
- Apache: An open-source web server software.
- Firefox: A free and open-source web browser.
- LibreOffice: A free and open-source office suite.
- GIMP: A free and open-source image editor.
Benefits of FOSS:
- Transparency: Anyone can inspect the source code to verify what the software does.
- Control: Users have control over the software and can modify it to suit their needs.
- Community b: FOSS projects often have large communities that contribute to and support the software.
- Cost: Most FOSS is available at no cost, making it accessible to a broader audience.
FOSS plays a crucial role in the software ecosystem, empowering users and developers to create, share, and improve software freely.
For founders, CTOs, and developers of Bitcoin companies however, whether your code is FOSS, or not has nothing to do with asking for your users trust. Your code being free is irrelevant, and being a Bitcoin company has nothing to do with the license your software runs under.
The vast majority of users who run FOSS never read the licenses or Source Code of the tools they use; they are normal people who simply want to get things done.
Gimp, Apache, Linux, Firefox are all fine tools that the license they're offered under has no bearing on the user's experience.
People use Gimp because they could not afford Photoshop, not because the source code was available. Today, they run it because Photoshop has not been ported to any GNU+Linux operating system with the Gnome interface. If Adobe ported Photoshop to Ubuntu, everyone would abandon Gimp for PS overnight.
ColdCard is secure not because people can copy the code; it is secure because it is properly and carefully written. The license code is written under cannot affect the execution or quality of software. This is the fundamental mistake Open Source fanatics make; they think virtue signaling to people who can't write "Hello World" in PHP matters; PROTIP, it DOESN'T MATTER and NO ONE CARES.
Open Source can kill companies. If you release your source code, you are inviting people to copy your ideas and compete with you, with no advantage to yourself.
The license you use to release your source doesn't matter either when it comes to the business risk; people can read your source and then re-implement it without using your code, and then BANG you've got a clone of your service trying to knock you out of the market.
If the people who are cloning you are better funded, more clever, able to look people in the eye when being spoken to, and are affable, then you've got a real problem.
And where are all the Bitcoin Cult checklist ticking followers when your magic dust is being "stolen" or "Ripped Off"? They will be nowhere...or buying the tools and service of your competitor because you believed some cult gibberish about MUH OPEN SAUCE.
Sharing source code and licenses that compel disclosure are useful things in narrow circumstances, like tools that underpin everything; SSL, GPG, HTTPS, POP3, SMPTE, C, C++, Linux, Bitcoin and so many other tools used to build tools or build businesses. The number of developers working on these tools is astonishing and everyone benefits. This is beyond argument.
But.
Just because other Open Source tools have big developer bases, it does not follow that every tool must be open source, and that the act of disclosing your source code under the GPL will attract an army of developers commiting changes.
You will have seen this with projects breathlessly announced at conferences that failed to attract developers to do the work for free to build them, the assumption being that developers are a magic and infinite resource with infinite time to work for free on an infinite amount of projects, the sole method of recruiting them being to chant "ACK" after posting your just about running source sketches on GitLab.
This is the fact that is left out when cheerleaders for Open Source make irrational claims about Open Source being the foundation of user trust. They're not seeing the big picture, are fatally unrealistic and in fact, don't see the picture at all.
It's a safe bet that they are not using Ubuntu, Mint or any GNU+Linux operating system for their daily work either, but are in fact hypocrites using *CHOKE* MiCro$oft Winblows and Micro$oft Visual Studio Code or MacOS as their development platform. They will never tell you this of course, while they type out their pro Open Source screeds on Google Chrome or M$ Word. We all know this.
In the final (and financial) analysis, all the virtue signalling in the world will not make people use your tool. Only a small number of fanatics care about the license your work is released under, and those people will not move the needle when it comes to changing the world, and the ones that will change the world will copy your weak sauce and turn it into hot sauce.
Bitcoin changing the world does not require Open Sourced tools; it requires what google did with Chrome; blasting the competition (Internet Exploder) to smithereens with a browser that beat every other browser by being better for the consumer. Failing to understand this is in 2024 a fundamental error.
Thankfully, there are serious people coming to Bitcoin who do not care about any of this, and who are focussed on doing a narrow range of things right. Google's Chrome is focussed on browsing the internet securely and quickly in a standards based way, providing password management and a few other things along the way. A very small number of things.
They're not interested in the latest fad, and do not have a model where they keep adding new services to their offering to be cool and hip; they do one thing and do it right.
Bitcoin companies are coming that do one thing and do it right. They are extremely focussed (not laser focussed) and they know that bitcoin is for other people, not for developers. By understanding this, they will be the people who change everything.
And again when it comes to the license your tool is released under, as far as the public is concerned...
IT DOESN'T MATTER and NO ONE CARES.
