#closed source

Cause, like, for all its faults StableDiffusion is doing a lot right, making itself open source, making its databases open, trying to create an opt-out system...

...But MJ and OpenAi aren't.

Despite Midjourney being widely considered the Best One, it's a total black box, with evidence that it does a lot of stuff "behind the scenes" to make it look better. And yet, despite almost certainly using similar publicly scraped resources from the commons, unlike StableDiffusion, the dataset is not available, and the model isn't Open Sourced.

Same thing with OpenAI, who's also trying to worm its way into things like stock footage and getting buddy-buddy with MS despite their stuff being closed like a bank lockbox.

And I think that SD getting all that crap flung its way when this is arguably way more concerning is... not great.

In today's digital era, software is integral to virtually every aspect of our lives—from facilitating communication and providing entertainment to enabling education and driving business functionalities. Among the myriad options for software, two categories predominate: open source and closed source. This article explores the reasons behind the frequent comparisons made between these two types of software, elucidates their clear-cut differences, and details the specific benefits each category brings to the table.

Why the Comparison?

People compare open source and closed source software for several reasons:

Cost Implications: Users evaluate whether the free accessibility of open source justifies the potential lack of official support versus the upfront or subscription costs of closed source software with dedicated support channels.

Customization Needs: Different users and organizations have varying requirements for customization. Open source software generally offers greater flexibility in this regard.

Security Concerns: Security is a paramount consideration. Some believe that the transparency and larger review process of open source projects enhance security, while others trust the rigorous testing and control over proprietary code in closed source models.

Development Philosophy: The comparison also reflects differing philosophies about intellectual property, innovation, and community involvement in software development.

Differences Between Open Source and Closed Source Software

Several key differences distinguish open source from closed source software:

Accessibility: Open source allows anyone to view, modify, and distribute the code, whereas closed source code is privately owned and not accessible to the general public.

Control and Transparency: Open source promotes transparency as the development process is public, encouraging trust and scrutiny from the community. Closed source, however, operates under a veil of secrecy regarding its development processes.

Licensing Terms: Open source software is typically licensed to allow modification and redistribution under certain conditions, while closed source licenses restrict such activities.

Advantages of Open Source Software

The merits of open source software include:

Cost-Effectiveness: Open source is often free to use, reducing upfront costs significantly.

Community Support: A large community of developers can provide support, patches, and enhancements.

Transparency and Security: The ability for anyone to inspect the code fosters trust and improves security through collective effort.

Flexibility: Users can customize and adapt the software according to their specific needs.

Advantages of Closed Source Software

Closed source software also presents notable benefits:

Commercial Support: Paid software often comes with professional support services, including warranties and regular updates.

Proven Security Practices: Closed source software undergoes stringent internal security testing and may be less susceptible to exploitation by malicious actors.

Feature Consistency: As development is controlled by a single entity or consortium, feature sets and roadmaps are more predictable and consistent.

Revenue Model: It provides a clear revenue stream for developers, which can lead to sustained investment in the product's development and improvement.

Conclusion

I am a huge proponent of open source. I really believe that Open source and free software allow an incredible level of innovation. Open source allows everyone to contribute and secure a program. Even still, Red Hat (RHEL) going closed source is a good thing. Why?

The honest truth is... a product that is sold is considered of higher value. This is why Apple, and Microsoft are successful, people have an innate desire to pay for quality. In Red Hat's case it is the standard in the server space. Red Hat is not truly for hobbyists, its for real world production.

The Linux community is worried that this will reduce the transparency and trust of Red Hat, and that it will create a barrier for people who want to use or contribute to Red Hat without paying (jessevas, 2023). This is true, yet it will increase innovation, because now the community has to design ways to go around depending on Red Hat. Plus it will give a push to other distributions of Linux to be used or be developed for servers. The community being dependent on one sole version of Linux, stifles creativity.

Red Hat will continue to provide and incredible platform and increase its focus on its specific use case. As Mike McGrath (2023) explains in an official Red Hat post: "Simply rebuilding code, without adding value or changing it in any way, represents a real threat to open source companies everywhere. This [...] has the potential to revert open source back into a hobbyist- and hackers-only activity". None of us want Linux to be just a pile of discs, usb keys, or ISOs that are just passed around between a small amount of niche users. In order for Linux to progress, it needs grow, even if it hurts.

References

jessevas (2023) Spice works. Has anyone else heard anything about RHEL becoming closed source? Retrieved from: https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/2488635-has-anyone-else-heard-anything-about-rhel-becoming-closed-source

the iOS ecosystem is now so popular and lucrative that entire markets and technologies (e.g. cloud gaming, 5G, AR) have only made it once they’re embraced by Apple, which means the company also defines how they’re deployed.

the iPhone UX is intentionally designed around apps and not websites. Note, for example, how much easier it is to navigate, manage and sort apps than browser tabs (and even if you bookmark a site or progressive web app to the homescreen, they open into your browser and then get lost or duplicated in tabs).

Many of these policies decisions are intended to protect users. Allowing browsers unlimited access to device drivers and folders poses a security risk, for example. However many seem specifically designed to protect Apple’s App Store and billing - especially for games, which drive 75% of App Store revenues.

Apple cannot reasonably argue developers and users can freely leverage the open web when Apple distributes the browsers used to access it, determines which standards and capabilities these browsers afford, and how a web app can interact with the user. Especially given the ways in which it unnecessarily limits the “open web”.

since 2020, Apple has required every iOS app that uses cross-platform accounts log-ins such as Facebook, Twitter, or Google, to use Apple IDs. Users don’t need to use their Apple IDs, of course, but many will - which means as a result, app makers such as the New York Times will need to support Apple ID on all devices and endpoints, including the PC web and Android. And it’s much harder to leave a hardware and services ecosystem when one of these services (i.e. identity) is your passport to the web.

It’s wrong to call the iPhone a product. The iPhone is a platform. It’s also a bundle of hardware + an operating system + distribution system + payment solution + services.

the very decisions that have made Apple so successful today also limit the number of creators that participate in the virtual economy, handicap the creativity of their products and business models, and make every transaction more expensive. Most important, it is blocking the organic evolution of the overall Internet.

Apple’s store fees are a clear example. We need businesses to be rewarded for the creation of value and able to invest accordingly. However, average profit margins in the US are between 10-15%. Apple’s 15-30% cut of revenue therefore means Apple collects more profit from the creation of a new digital business or digital sale than those who invested and took risk to build it. As Apple is the most valuable company in history, generates more operating cash flow than any company in history, and operates the most successful product in history, Apple’s uncontested toll system is probably not an ideal outcome.

Apple’s “current organizing principle is digital versus analog; anything that is digital has to have in-app purchase, while anything that is analog — i.e. connected to the real world — can monetize however it pleases. That is why Amazon or Uber can ask for your credit card, and Airbnb can do the same for rooms but not for digital experiences (according to Apple).

the Roblox situation is a feature, not a bug. Apple's default position is that all the products created in and on platforms that are distributed by iOS should be instead individual 'apps' that can be purchased on its App Store. As a result, Apple is always the platform a consumer uses to access an app and that a developer uses to build, distribute and monetize their apps.

Everyone wins — we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.

Jobs is very clear: developers should not use cross-platform development tools, but instead iOS tools. They should make the best iOS apps, not the best apps. And this will be better for users, and thus better for the developers. This logic doesn’t just apply to Flash, Unreal or Unity, but also Roblox Studio, Fortnite Creative Mode, and Minecraft.

Perché affermare “di comprare” un software è errato

La differenza tra open source e software commerciale? Non compriamo un software, ne acquistiamo i diritti d’uso. (more…)

10 years of the iPhone: Apple’s flagship device has taken us back as many steps as it has taken us forward

The 10th anniversary of the Apple iPhone reminds us that while it was not the first smartphone, it was the first to achieve mass-market appeal. Since then the iPhone has defined the approach that other smartphone manufacturers have taken. Smartphones have transformed our lives, essentially giving us an internet-connected computer in our pocket. But while we’re distracted by Candy Crush or Pokemon…

Megacosm in relation to ford is experiencing a phenomenal revolution which has redefined the whole thought of communication. Thanks to the mobile application development platforms.<\p>

There is no module platform in that mobile application development which is not being pushed in uniformity with tough unfavorable competitors. Till sparse earlier, the only market leader as a platform pertaining to museum piece triangular bandage development was Apple's iOS. All at once the very model is hugely shared by Google's Android. Symbian, Blackberry and Windows Phone are also in the market as the mobile application development platforms. Its market is getting such a viral that dead Facebook is prearrangement so that help along a mobile apps store.<\p>

Top 6 Mobile Application Addition Platforms (Smartphone Operating Systems) which predicate covered yet than 99% referring to the all-comprehensive Smartphone commercial relations share are in what way follows:<\p>

1. Android of Google Inc<\p>

Android is an inaugurate annunciator going system which belongs to Google Inc. Android and iOS are the dualistic major mobile tent development platforms which air support almost 89% of the whole on the fire system balance of trade share.<\p>

With its fairy-tale like popularity among the users, this all-around app development platform alone has captured as high as 56.1 percent in relation with global Smartphone Operating System sales share.<\p>

Androids prefer to passing through 500,000 and counting apps from on and on than 10 billion downloads and just about 1 million activation every quinquennium.<\p>

2. iOS (iPhone OS) of Apple Inc<\p>

iOS is the mobile operating development keynote speech for all iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch devices having haphazardly 315 million users worldwide. It is a closed source Smartphone horizontal line having 650,000 applications, in addition to 30 billion downloads from its germaneness reservation. Alter ego has covered 22.9% global market be affected.<\p>

3. Symbian in re Nokia<\p>

Symbian is an open source inaction system which belongs in Nokia. Around 8.6% mobiles re the world is running this mobile concernment development platform. Apart leaving out Nokia, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, Hurting and Fujitsu mobiles are also using this application ring.<\p>

4. BlackBerry of RIM<\p>

Globally, about 6.9% mobiles are progressively BlackBerry operating line. This mean-minded source motivational phone application launching pad has around 60,000 applications available now its apps store, with over 2 milliard and encompassing downloads. Everyday its app store witnesses 6 million downloads straddleback an average.<\p>

5. Bada of Samsung Electronics<\p>

Bada Operating System is a closed principle platform developed for terra cotta app development. Subconscious self is developed by Samsung Electronics. Currently it is supporting zapped 40,000 applications and enjoying worldwide share of Bada OS based Samsung phone by around 2.7%.<\p>

6. Windows Call up of Microsoft<\p>

Windows Phone is a closed source mobile operating quietude, competent the obovoid wholesaling with 1.9% of its share. Him is developed by Microsoft, and it has been integrated with Microsoft services as well as with some non-Microsoft services.<\p>

By now it has bagged around 100,000 applications. It is expected up to grow in great pace because of its association with Nokia ingoing the coming days.<\p>