Device Safety and Codes of Conduct

I agree that the only way any software can be ever considered secured is when source code can be publicly audited. Having millions of programmers able to scrutinize code for errors, more elegant routines and vulnerabilities of any sort will be more efficient and effective than a handful of programmers with a million hours of development time. The other side of the coin though not addressed anywhere in the proposal is the dual problem of theft of code by competitors and programmer's salaries. Without someway that programmers will get paid for their efforts then nobody could afford working as a programmer.

I know that this is an old argument and that the great open source operating system, Linux, is still growing and expanding from the work of countless programmers working on this platform and its application for free. But how many of these programmers are getting paid for programming something else. How many of these programmers are just pure philanthropic providers of all of their software.

I don't have a solution to this paradox, I wish I did. I maybe mislead by my perspective somehow and this is really a false paradox. I truly hoped that I'm just mislead. But this proposal does not even recognize this paradox, be it real or false.