So you’re not going to use the tools that you think are the best and most productive and instead depend on the kindness of strangers volunteering in their free time?
And before you cite “Linux”, look at who the top contributors are - all corporations.
Yes and how deep down are you willing to do everything on your own and does it give you a competitive advantage - ie “does it make the beer taste better”?
If you think this is insane or don't understand the viewpoint, I refer you to the fable of the wolf and the dog. https://fablesofaesop.com/the-dog-and-the-wolf.html
I don’t know about you. But I can’t seem to kick my addiction to food and shelter.
The best method based on my experience and talents that I know how to adequately feed my addiction is by exchanging my labor doing software development for money.
Which is why it's all the more important for those of us who can afford to be principled to do so.
That is true but no single corporation has control of Linux. Linux (the kernel) has managed to harness corporations to fund developers so they can work full time on it without giving said corporations "editorial control" over Linux.
Individual corporations that pay Linux developers have some influence over the type of things that are worked on (by paying people that specialise in some parts of the kernel over others) but they don't get to decide what actually goes into the mainline kernel.
Unfortunately the same isn't true of most languages where there is often a single corporation behind it.
The answer is not always open source, even if I think that the contribution of open source to the overall ecosystem is both positive and invaluable, as it clearly empowers individuals.
The dangerous trend is concentration of everything. We don't have to use every services from Google or Apple etc.
I only use Google Maps from Google, nothing else. I use iOS from Apple, but I barely use my phone these days.
We need more diversity to have less corporate control, increase healthy competition and mitigate the political risks.
Definitely one area we don't have to compromise principles.
It's also important how its distributed, if in a main distribution at least a pair of eyes or two have looked at the source.