It seems odd that we have generally accepted a view of what open source means that is fundamentally libertarian in character. How we got here makes sense - the Microsoft wars and the battle for free software were once about how we retain control of our own technology. Now we are in a very different place where that control has been assured to some extent. Open source is now ubiquitous and so the ethical concerns we collectively focus on should perhaps extend beyond these old debates.
Maybe it's time we examine our entrenched views on open source to allow for some more nuanced discussions about responsibility and ethics in the things we make. Just because it's open source clearly doesn't mean that I'm absolved of responsibility for how it's used; so why do all open source licences necessitate that I allow my work to be put to evil uses as well as good?
Can we continue indefinitely with these hollow definitions of "freedom" that are devoid of any concept of responsibility or accountability for what we create?
Maybe it's time we examine our entrenched views on open source to allow for some more nuanced discussions about responsibility and ethics in the things we make. Just because it's open source clearly doesn't mean that I'm absolved of responsibility for how it's used; so why do all open source licences necessitate that I allow my work to be put to evil uses as well as good?
Can we continue indefinitely with these hollow definitions of "freedom" that are devoid of any concept of responsibility or accountability for what we create?