Hacker News Reader

> Think about the open source software movement (OSS). One crucial perspective that the OSS shares with D&I is that both view discrimination as an impediment to progress. OSS licenses include several non-discrimination clauses (economic, field of endeavor, other restrictions). The licenses go to great lengths to ensure the technology is available to everyone.

While licenses may have clauses that deal with some kinds of discrimination, OSS communities are not inclusive and may actually be outright hostile to groups of people. The last Model View Culture had an article about this [1]. Suffice it to say that there is no common community behavior that appears in all OSS groups and what is exceptable in one group vs. another varies quite a bit.

> Or is it the open air bazaar, with all kinds of people talking (softly or loudly) in a place known for public discourse. A place where anyone can walk by and join in and become part of what's going on?

Well this come back to the very common myth of meritocracy in tech, that tech only looks at merit and thus avoids discrimination, personal and institutional. However, meritocracy in tech often simply functions as a way for people to avoid talking about bias or pretending like bias doesn't exist. Moreover, what it means to look for merit is often defined as those statuses and symbols that are comfortable to the dominant group of people in tech, white men of middle or higher class backgrounds.

> So this isn't really about embracing D&I. Instead, the tech community needs to start living up to its own rhetoric--it's own values. This isn't about adopting an external issue, it's about a community fully aligning with its own values.

Again, there is no consensus on values and often people actively advocate that there should be little criticism or reflection on what people and groups in tech value. Without that kind of introspection and discussion, little will change.

[1] http://modelviewculture.com/pieces/leaving-toxic-open-source...

All great points. You have highlighted exactly what I was getting at: the tech world has some of these D&I principles in place already, but is failing to live up to, or--as you aptly point out--even critically reflect on them.

OSS communities are not inclusive

Community or inclusion aspect is a red herring imho. I use opensource software all day every day and barely ever even communicate with its authors.

I'm willing to bet that majority of open source code is just some dude banging it out in his free time with maybe an occasional question or a patch if he's really lucky. No community at all, just a repo, a package, and a few stars on GitHub.

I don't get this idea that the tech world, or even just SV startups embrace FOSS as a core values, even in software itself. Since when have most startups released all their software under a free license? Most embrace it if and when it suits them - libraries, frameworks, etc. Everything else is proprietary, and usually follows a cathedral model. When was the last time someone submitted a patch for Dropbox, or most SaaS services out there?

Three are a few brave ones out there, but they're the exception.

I wholeheartedly agree, yet certain people continually attach open source as somehow being the worst of our industry. Just because it requires people be passionate enough about development to do it in their free time.

To be fair, github culture is a far cry from the early days of open source.

If I didn't run in with the first/second generation of OSS developers, I probably wouldn't like the culture either.

Now get off my lawn!

I don't think I've ever met anyone who thinks open source shouldn't exist. I know quite a few people who don't want to open source everything they make.