-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
index.html
151 lines (138 loc) · 6.99 KB
/
index.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
<head>
<title>Writing on inequity in open source</title>
<link href="./styles.css" rel="stylesheet">
</head>
<body>
<h1>Inequity in open source labor</h1>
<p>
This started as a list of articles about how how structural inequality shows up in open source, focusing on labor,
(lack of) compensation, and how that impacts access negatively for oppressed peoples. It is now moving towards
writing about deeper structural and historical analysis of open source in the context of extractive corporate
capitalism.
</p>
<h2>Motivation</h2>
<p>
In early 2021, I wanted to start writing about structural problems with labor and equity in open source. In doing my
research I was surprised to find that there isn't much writing on this topic readily available on the internet. I
collected these articles (and added some notes) to organize my findings (and perhaps save other likeminded people
some time in the future).
</p>
<p>
I've intentionally left out academic journal articles (at least for now) to prioritize
accessibility/approachability.
</p>
<h2>Resources</h2>
<h3>Historical analyses</h3>
<article>
<h4><span class="article-title">Post-Open Source</span> by Melody Horn</h4>
<blockquote>
<p>
the free software movement was on occasion writing actually good software; corporations saw that and wanted to
get in on it without having to actually have principles. so they embraced the nominal goals of the free software
movement and extended it into a more corporate-friendly movement with a larger pile of software to draw from.
the conventional step after embrace and extend is, naturally, extinguish. the free software movement died long
ago, in no small part due to its own mistakes, so there's not much left to extinguish. that which is being
extinguished, that which died with mozilla, is the idea that the open source movement could have any other
principles than corporate exploitation.
</p>
</blockquote>
<a href="https://www.boringcactus.com/2020/08/13/post-open-source.html" class="orig-article-link" target="_blank">
(read original article)
</a>
</article>
<h3>Barriers to entry</h3>
<article>
<h4><span class="article-title">The Dangers of Being Open</span> by Amira Dalla</h4>
<blockquote>
<p>
But what happens when only certain people are able to contribute to open projects and what happens when only
certain people are able to access open resources? This means that the movement is not actually open to everyone
and only obtainable by those who can practice and access it. In parts of the world being open can mean people
will steal your ideas which could negatively impact your livelihood. In other parts, being open means that you
are a target for harassment or violence which could result in physical and emotional abuse. From my experience,
it has become more apparent over the years that being open is actually not obtainable to the masses. That being
open is something of a privilege. <em>That being open is actually elite.</em>
</p>
</blockquote>
<a href="https://medium.com/@amirad/the-dangers-of-being-open-b50b654fe77e" class="orig-article-link"
target="_blank">
(read original article)
</a>
</article>
<article>
<h4><span class="article-title">The Ethics of Unpaid Labor and the OSS Community</span> by Ashe Dryden</h4>
<blockquote>
<p>
OSS contribution takes time; I don’t think anyone would contest that. Getting familiar with a project, finding
out where you can fit into it, reading and responding to issues, testing and submitting patches, writing
documentation. All of that requires a good deal of time.
Marginalized people in tech - women, people of color, people with disabilities, LGBTQ people, and others -
have less free time for a few major reasons: dependent care, domestic work and errands, and pay inequity.
</p>
</blockquote>
<a href="https://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-and-the-oss-community" class="orig-article-link"
target="_blank">
(read original article)
</a>
</article>
<article>
<h4><span class="article-title">Privilege, Communiy, and Open Source</span> by Jessica Lord</h4>
<p>
Jessica Lord provides a very personal account of what she gave up to begin working in open source (and the
privileges that allowed her to).
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
In order to learn JavaScript and contribute to open source (getting that GitHub portfolio) I had to work nearly
constantly. Wednesday mornings were the same as Saturday nights. For me all that suffered was my DIY blog. What
if I had a parent, partner or child that depended on me? What if I couldn't move across the country or afford to
take such a risk with finances? This dramatically cuts the pool of potential down to those who have monetary
resources and little or no dependent obligations.
</p>
<p>
Making a living at open source is still more rare than the norm. How do people who don’t already have enough
work constantly for nothing?
</p>
</blockquote>
<a href="http://jlord.us/blog/osos-talk.html" class="orig-article-link" target="_blank">
(read original article)
</a>
</article>
<h3>Data</h3>
<article>
<h4>Open Source Survey</h4>
<p>
In 2017, GitHub (in partnership with external researchers) surveyed 6,000 people who work on or with open source
software. This survey provided a rare quantitative snapshot of gender and race in open source communities. The
numbers indicate that people in open source are overwhelmingly white straight cis men.
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
The gender imbalance in open source remains profound: 95% of respondents are men; just 3% are women and 1% are
non-binary. Women are about as likely as men (68% vs 73%) to say they are very interested in making future
contributions, but less likely to say they are very likely to actually do so (45% vs 61%).
</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>
1% of respondents identify as transgender (including 9% of women in open source), and 7% identify as lesbian,
gay, bisexual, asexual, or another minority sexual orientation. 26% are immigrants (from and to anywhere in the
world) and 16% are members of ethnic or national minorities in the country where they currently live.
</p>
</blockquote>
<a href="https://opensourcesurvey.org/2017/#insights" class="orig-article-link" target="_blank">
(read original article)
</a>
</article>
<h3>Suggestions?</h3>
<p>
If you have a source you think I should include here, you can
<a href="mailto:coding@outofambit.com?subject=OSS Resource Suggestion">
email me
</a>
or
<a href="https://github.com/outofambit/oss-inequity-articles/discussions/new">
suggest it on GitHub
</a>.
</p>
</body>