As the digital world continues to grow in size and complexity, the movement towards Free and Open-Source Software (FOSS) expands in tandem with this growth. However, this movement is threatened by Big Tech attempting to consolidate complete hardware control on one side, and Governments implementing seemingly ham-fisted, restrictive measures on the other.

Despite the technical achievements of the FOSS community, they have limited acknowledgment in the wider community. There are fleeting and vaguely understood mentions by the government, and the average person on the street wouldn’t even know what Linux is, despite knowing about proprietary operating systems like Windows and macOS.

Despite intense passion from people within the Open-Source community, very few bring that passion to non-technical community groups or political organisations. When questions around technology appear in those circles, the only information they are given comes from Big Tech. They use their immense wealth to push solutions designed to generate the most profit for those companies. Their advertising and consistent lobbying are left unchallenged. A pro-FOSS voice, even a tiny one, can inform the public about the Open-Source alternative, increasing dependence on and thus desire to protect FOSS.

Some people believe governments should stay out of the Open-Source Movement.The reality is, Free and Open-Source Software plays a big role in how the IT industry works. Not only does it allow average people to access digital tools without needing to pay fees, but it also gives startups significantly more opportunity to compete in a highly competitive industry.

The most notable Competitors of the big five Tech Titans use FOSS like Linux, the biggest being Canonical and Valve, worth Millions and Billions respectively.

Additionally, of the 10 Major Linux Distributions (Plus OpenBSD) on Distrowatch, the Majority are Community run. Two notable ones: the stable Debian and the customisable Arch, are what Canonical’s Ubuntu and Valve’s SteamOS are respectively based on.

Ultimately, a world without FOSS won’t mean a world without those conglomerates, it would mean a world where competing against conglomerates is viable. These tools are maintained by communities and enable those without the financial power to replicate those tools to not lag too far behind the cutting edge.

Open-Source Software only exists if we put in place an environment that allows it to exist. If we want to keep the barrier of entry for new tech companies low by allowing usable FOSS, then we need to ensure that such software is protected, and that the hardware is able to run it.

The Free and Open-Source Software community puts in a lot of work to enable people to use devices as they wish, but there are a lot of ways the world is structured that slows down progress immensely.

One example is phones. These are some of the most power efficient and petite computers ever mass-produced. Their ARM architecture is the second most supported behind x86, and endless examples of the chipset capacity for reuse have been displayed by devices like the Raspberry Pi.

However, enigmatic and proprietary firmware, coupled with difficult or impossible to unlock bootloaders make installing and supporting these devices – despite the best efforts of projects like PostmarketOS – very difficult. When you combine these factors with the additional ‘feature’ an of activation lock preventing resets, second-hand handsets become destined for landfill, being too small and tedious to properly and profitably recycle.

Despite the technical complications that arise from these issues, a relatively simple policy by the government can provide a remedy*. Requiring devices allows users to unlock their devices. Enabling them to be wiped after prolonged inactivity, and an overall policy agenda that seeks to separate control of hardware and software markets so that today’s technology can be used to its fullest extent.

* Big emphasis on “relatively”. Policy is a very complicated thing, and there will likely be many roadblocks and exceptions found along the way. Relative to the other convoluted issues the government has been made to manage, firmware requirements would be simple.

When we look at examples of government action, every time action was taken at the expense of the wider community, communities resisted. Sometimes, those communities won.

Government is not an entity making decisions for us, it is where the people who advocate for their beliefs fight to be seen. If we truly want Free and Open-Source Software to exist, we need to be there in the trenches with other communities of people working to reach our fullest potential in the ways we see fit.

Wyatt is based in Geraldton and has a background in Community Services. He is a true believer in grassroots campaigns, with over a thousand one-on-one conversations pushing for what he believes in. Wyatt developed an interest in Linux while helping with E-waste recycling, which taught him the importance of separating hardware and software in retaining the longevity of computers. Wyatt considers it vital for those who love FOSS to be involved in the community at large and keep technology in the hands of anyone willing to use it.

Oryginally published at:

https://spektrumlab.io/why-open-source-must-be-a-movement-not-just-a-model-wyatt-teakle/