mobileturdfctry

This is interesting. I've recently been doing quite a bit of research into what my "future stack" is going to be for backend. MinIO regularly came onto my radar but one heuristic (among many) I use to determine which software is TRULY open source and which is far less likely to remain open source is whether they even provide a link to their Github page and prominently display it on their website. MinIO was triggering my "not really open source" radar for this reason.

I'm still dabbling but have kind of latched onto the idea of using Ceph. To my understanding they were acquired by RedHat, and the project has all the signs of real open source, including the fact that it originated as a doctoral research project at the University of California, Santa Cruz, with initial funding from the U.S. Department of Energy.

Henry Ford's philosophy was that if he paid his workers a higher wage, they would be able to afford the products they were producing, namely his Model T automobiles. This would, in turn, create a larger customer base for his company and help stimulate the economy by increasing consumer spending.

The fact that there is proprietary software running in "open source" mobile phone OSes may not be addressing the source of the problem. Because it seems that by funding a project like this it almost implies that the parties funding it don't necessarily trust the people who own and thus could open source the proprietary blobs tomorrow.

The leap I seem to have trouble getting to is this. If you can't trust the people responsible for the proprietary software, how can you be sure that they won't turn around and start using new chips or software once the existing ones are reverse engineered? Perhaps it's about patents and the patent holders could be using this IP as a cash cow?

The one that I had in mind while writing this was a "variation on this theme". Altered Carbon (Netflix, 2018–2020), based on the 2002 novel by Richard K. Morgan.

There are a number of others, though as well where the recurring theme seems to be the "evil elites" leaving the poor to fend for themselves.

Definitely agree, no one "knows" how the world works. I don't think the OP presumes anyone does. The intention in saying this was to point out that there are some (these days it seems many) who are off the mark in an almost tragic way, and have no desire to reflect / improve on this.

Not sure if the 'No' was to say you disagree. I'm not sure, from reading the rest of your comment, that it is a disagreement. If you care to clarify I'll try to come back to respond at some point.

I think the "elites" you're talking about won't want to leave. They'll want to stick around so they can "have power" and fleece the people that will continue to let them do it. They won't feel at home unless they have people they can take advantage of.

I think "elite" is the wrong term maybe. I think the use of that term is pulling more from how these stories tend to paint the two groups. One being the "haves" the other the "have nots". It's true "socioeconomic status" in some way can be considered in this category I'm thinking of, but I'm thinking more from an academic perspective. People who show a true curiosity about the world around them. People who will survive in pretty much any situation because they're the ones who have the most to contribute to a society.