Thanks for laying out your reasoning here :) However, I don’t think you have fully adressed the worrying point. The concern here is that good quality faking wi

Thanks for laying out your reasoning here :) However, I don’t think you have fully adressed the worrying point. The concern here is that good quality faking will become less expensive, thus, more faking will happen. Making it even just marginally more expensive means that there will be less faking overall (no matter the resources of actors) which is seen as good. Thus, your argument towards more equitable access seems to have to explain, how it provides more value than the harm that may be caused by this dynamic, which would in my opinion require some argument for the potential good that could be done by this technology vs. the harm it could cause - which you haven‘t really done. Just arguing for the „balancing of scales“ doesn‘t go far enough. For example, you can draw an analogy to weapons regulation. Just trying to balance the scales by giving people easy access to weapons has shown to not work too well in practice. The rich still have more money to buy better, bigger weapons or defenses while the poor shoot themselves almost regularly. So, to make a convincing case for open sourcing this stuff you should provide a good argument for why we are not talking about weapons here but positive, productive goods with low potential for abuse.