It's an unavoidable truth (I hope that by this point it is) that an open source collaborative development model (them who are able to contribute are allowed to

It's an unavoidable truth (I hope that by this point it is) that an open source collaborative development model (them who are able to contribute are allowed to do so; no questions asked) produces better software than an in-house or private, restricted, development models. and while there are some tradeoffs, the advantages (I hope) are overwhelmingly in favor of open collaboration. this is so important that the entirety of science (real (old-?)world science) hinges on this open access and 'public' collaboration; there's less of this kind of science now than before.... (see also: ongoing scientific publishing revolt) but I digress, none of this to say that there's no problems, but the problems are more social (cultural and economic) than they're technical. the points are: collaborative models of software development are technically superior; they make better software. the 'problem' of how to "make this into a business" cannot be solved, we must re-evaluate wtf a 'business' even means. we need to question why do 'things' need to be 'businesses'.