Dangerous than proprietary software

Wondering whether to use the software with closed source, it is necessary to assess this step in terms of ethical implications. Eric Raymond (Eric S. Raymond), a well-known theorist of the movement for open source software and one of the founders of the Open Source Initiative, published in his blog a new essay, which presented a number of objective reasons why proprietary software is harmful.

The author of the famous "Cathedral and the Bazaar" proposed five criteria by which the user can assess the potential damage that can bring the use of a proprietary software product. Based on these criteria, users can decide whether to purchase proprietary software or open alternatives to turn to in order to minimize the negative consequences.

A. "Damage from insecurity." The most fundamental damage, which can be expected from proprietary software - that it is much worse than projected and far less reliable than the open. The weight of the injury depends on the complexity of the program - the program is more complicated, the more there can be errors, which makes the damage from indoor sources is much more serious. Thus it is necessary to consider the possible harm from each error - the stronger it is, the higher the benefit of open source over proprietary software.

Two. "The harm from the inability to change the code." Another source of harm from proprietary software - the inability to modify the code to fit their needs, individually or in hands of experts. The amount of damage is dependent on the value of modifications: for the software with respect to the general purpose of the consequences will be more severe than for highly specialized applications that exist in one installation and perform strictly limited tasks.

Three. "Harm-house." Closed code puts the user in an asymmetric position with the developer. People who have the privilege to view and modify the code of the Software may use their facilities for unlawful purposes: limiting user choice, be compelled to cash payments, or control over the transferred information. Any proprietary software that is used for communication between people is a concern that its authors may use their privileged position to spy on, or censorship.

4. "Harm to bind the vendor." Proprietary code makes it difficult to migrate to other software, greatly increasing the cost of its implementation. A striking example is the text editors that use proprietary formats that are not supported in alternative programs. A separate category of binding to the vendor - the so-called "positive network externalities" of the program, that is, its popularity among users. The more people use certain software, the higher its value for each individual, which also makes it difficult to move. The damage from the "positive network externalities" is similar to damage from binding to the vendor and is measured in the amount of the costs of migration.

Five. "Harm forgotten." The last factor is malicious proprietary software - the risk of data loss with the disappearance of the software that can handle them. Thus, at the dawn of the computerization of magnetic media remained important historical data stored within the program of space research in the U.S. 60 years. Despite the fact that the media is in excellent condition, the data can not be read because they were recorded using proprietary formats that are implemented in hardware, and specifications to them for a long time lost. With the spread of communications through the computer software, the harm from proprietary software, more and more increasing.

Based on these criteria, we can conclude that the firmware is safe appliances are available with closed-source, and operating systems and office suites - no. Damage to the vendor-binding and positive network externalities in the case of a toaster or no elevator at all. Firmware is a small harm of insecurity - in case of error in the code of the device will simply cease to work, and little harm from the inability to change the code - even having the opportunity to change the firmware, the user is unlikely to add new functionality to the device. It is hard to imagine how the appliances can be turned against the user, so the harm from the house is also low. On the other hand, more complex devices such as home routers, already at risk: recorded cases manipulation of the DNS or the introduction of advertising into the browser.

In contrast, for a closed operating system code indicates the level of harm caused by the unreliability of moderate to very high, depending on the installed applications and the costs associated with failures of the system. The harm from the inability to change the code is extremely high, even for inexperienced users: fixes and updates to the OS come only when the provider deems it necessary. The scale of damage can be estimated from the house, just remembering how much unwanted applications is standard with Windows; bound to the same vendor and "harm to
 
forgotten "the user is facing, using, for example, proprietary file formats or streaming video. High damage, and on the "network of positive factors."

For the same reasons, suffer from a closed source software, and office users of smartphones, says the author. The user should avoid private desktop and mobile software: it comes from them the most serious harm, and that they are most strongly tied to itself and to the supplier. In the event that proprietary software does not open alternatives, Raymond advises the user to decide on their own.

"In the end, in the world, there is another injury, and he is much stronger than the strongest damage, which can cause closed software - says the author. - Remember that the goal of all ethical rules is to reduce the harm itself, and act accordingly. "