I am starting to wonder why Open Source became the standard as apposed to alternatives. Clearly a love/passion/aptitude/... puts people in a position where they

I am starting to wonder why Open Source became the standard as apposed to alternatives. Clearly a love/passion/aptitude/... puts people in a position where they contribute time and expertise for some/no reward that matches a cost/benefit. The article list the truth behind volunteering and the consequent constraints. Why is it that way though? The planet has public money advancing major scientific interests in an organised though potentially politically aggravated mechanism. Would a lack of action on a subject of possible national security be tolerated due to the rights of volunteers? How about international security? Is it politics/government/non scientific interests that make open source the most successful answer to by the people for the people?