unreasonable effectiveness of social scaffolding

the ethos of open source is self-determination, celebrating the ideal of human agency.

in the most permissive form of open source, one could just run, fork, contribute to projects async and at will. no part of collaboration, competition, interest group forming and breaking are forced. the project is self documented. info is transparent and info streams are neither censored nor manipulated.

such running dynamics are the utopian template to society of minds. the software or ai model are just side effects of the organic cultural evolution.

however, all human endeavors are embedded in a social scaffolding. different architecture affords degrees of expression to open source ideology.

in an imaginarily abundant, free and secure society, open source ideology has no contextual bottleneck. human agency has chance to fully express.

on the contrary, if info streams are tightly monitored and actively censored, military force monopolized and the ruling class has no direct responsibility to people, the expression of human agency has nothing to do with software or ai model are open sourced or not. the underlying social scaffolding dominates. reality checks both superficially feeling good and self interest motivated slogans.

so, if the purpose to open source is to celebrate human agency, open source or not is not straight forward. blindly supporting open source may not be the best strategy. we have to think about to what ends?

ps: all grammar and logical errors are not proof of laziness, but proof of human.