# The Dark Collab Manifesto: Protecting Open Source in the Age of Divide

## What

We are building:

1. a local first desktop client on top of the Radicle network with the goal to make Radicle simpler and more accessible to a wider audience of developers.
2. blockchain protocols for a) incentivization and coordination of third party nodes that provide hosting & compute on top of the Radicle network as well as b) integrations with naming protocol & infrastructure with the goal to enhance the developer experience while using Radicle.
3. infrastructure for deploying and operating seed nodes either self-hosted or third party hosted.

**All of our efforts are guided by the principles of open access anywhere in the world for everyone, with contributions being private by default.**

## Strategies

#### Option 1: Go after the self-hosted market.

Radicle has superiror architecture to every other self hosted instance, but that comes at the cost of perceived complexity. The main differentiator is the p2p aspect of Radicle but that’s also the biggest detractor.

This strategy requires us that we also build the best product for this segment. A likely solution would be to build the best self hosted forge by “hiding” the p2p stuff and then give users the option to enable them later. [Market analysis is needed].

#### Option 2: Double down on “freedom devs” and follow their needs.

This will require early user interviews about what is the path that will make them go from “I will mirror to Radicle” to “I will move to Radicle” and “I will pay for Radicle”.

Existing hypothesis are that: a) they might be willing to pay for redundancy or b) CI.

Here we would need to a) assess how big this market is and b) the viability / opportunity of the above.

#### Option 3: Lead with code distribution and CI instead of collaboration

[TBD]

## Open Questions

- New brand? or use Radworks brand? or both?
- What happens if Alexis, Ele and Jason spend time on the above instead of their own orgs? Is it even wise?
-

## Why

### The Dark Collab Manifesto: Protecting Open Source in the Age of Divide

In today’s world, geopolitical tensions have led to a desire among many governments to fragment the internet, each seeking control over the flow of information within their borders. This drive for fragmentation is fueled by growing political, economic, and ideological divides, creating an environment where censorship is becoming increasingly normalized. Whether it’s restricting access to AI tools or stifling voices that challenge the status quo, the open exchange of ideas is under attack. In parallel, legal complexities for open-source contributors are mounting. Developers must now navigate a labyrinth of regulations, sanctions, and copyright laws, often at great personal risk. **The solution lies in a new motto for open source: truly open access with private by default contributions.**

In recent years, unjustified censorship of open-source repositories has become alarmingly common. In 2019, GitHub restricted access to repositories in countries like Iran, Syria, and Crimea, citing U.S. sanctions. This move blocked countless developers from accessing or contributing to critical open-source projects, not for security reasons, but due to geopolitical agendas. Another instance occurred in 2021, when YouTube-dl, a popular open-source tool, was temporarily removed from GitHub following a DMCA takedown request from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). This incident highlighted how corporate influence can unfairly suppress tools used for legal purposes under the guise of copyright infringement.

Meanwhile, legal threats toward FOSS developers are on the rise. In 2021, the developer of qBittorrent, an open-source BitTorrent client, faced lawsuits over its alleged use for piracy, despite the tool being legal and used for legitimate purposes by many. Similarly, in 2017, the creator of Popcorn Time, a FOSS media player, was sued for enabling piracy, even though the software itself did not host or distribute illegal content. These legal pressures deter innovation and contribute to a climate of fear among developers.

On a broader scale, initiatives proposing the fragmentation of the internet have gained traction. China’s Great Firewall is a longstanding example, which filters and controls internet access for over a billion people. More recently, the European Union has pushed forward with its Digital Sovereignty agenda, which includes proposals for a localized, EU-only internet infrastructure. The Russian RuNet initiative seeks to create a self-contained internet for Russia, insulating the country from global networks. These efforts are designed to silo digital information within national borders, disrupting cross-border collaboration and threatening the open-source community's global nature.

[Add a paragraph that links to the bottom. Big question ofc is if internet gets fragmented how Radicle still makes sense?]

### Locking Open Source Right Open with P2P and Privacy

To secure the future of open-source collaboration, we must ensure that it remains truly open by prioritizing privacy, decentralization, and autonomy. The evolving landscape demands that we:

1. Decentralize hosting of code repositories, ensuring that no single entity or government can monopolize or control access to the open-source ecosystem. Radicle already solves that.

2. Anonymize contribution systems, empowering developers to contribute privately, without fear of legal repercussions, personal risks, or political retaliation. Radicle’s TOR integration is a good first step but more is needed. [add what else]

3. Build global code distribution networks that transcend national borders, ensuring open-source projects remain accessible to all, regardless of political or economic constraints. Radicle is a good first start but much more is needed. [add what else]

4. Implement verifiable code contributions, enabling cryptographic proof of each submission's origin, guaranteeing transparency and accountability without compromising contributor privacy. Radicle already solves that.

5. Establish consensus-driven compute, where distributed networks validate and execute code through consensus mechanisms, ensuring security and reliability. This decentralizes both the execution and validation of code, protecting it from centralized manipulation. N/A today.

6. Foster resilient, multi-party governance models, allowing diverse stakeholders to collaboratively manage and guide open-source projects, preventing the concentration of power and control. Radicle already solves that.