4 ms·

Releasing the source code to the clients would also address many of our concerns.

kepano 5mo ago
How would that make a difference for plugin security? Almost all plugins are already open source. If you mean for the security of the app without plugins you can currently inspect the app's code in app.js and review third-party audits: https://obsidian.md/security https://obsidian.md/security
- foofloobar 5mo ago
  [flagged]
  - GlacierFox 5mo ago
    "Oh, please, say you want to keep it closed source because you're afraid you'll lose money and control." That's not good enough for open source zealots. That's when you end up being the headliner in an endless flood of blog posts and detailing comments telling everyone you're a 'proprietary evil man'. It's open source or nothing. And how dare you make money.
  - Capricorn2481 5mo ago
    This is pearl clutching. This feels like a massive overreaction. If you don't want to use it because it's not open source, that's fine, but you're spreading a lot of snarky FUD about the creators. They are not making excuses, they stated clearly why open sourcing it is tangential to this problem at best, and they're not the only user to call out the hijacking of the thread. They have been quite clear about why they keep it closed source, so I don't know why you're making it sound like they are lying to their users. Your rant about audits has little to do with the article too. Telling everyone we're going to get rug pulled is exactly the kind of performative FUD that is meant to get a reaction more than anything. Speaking for myself, I'm going to keep using it, because nothing has come close to the convenience and performance. Would love an open source alternative to prove me wrong, but I haven't seen it.
    - foofloobar 5mo ago
      That's your opinion. I respect your choices and your opinions. I speak for myself. This is the first time I've seen this company's CEO post somewhere. I really couldn't trust this software less. To be fair, when someone comes up with excuses for not making something open source, it comes off as dishonest. Be honest. Say that you want to keep it closed to keep control and make money. There's no need to say otherwise. I do the same. I keep code private to make money. I don't say more than that. You'll see a plethora of such apps made with LLMs. People will write something custom to meet their own needs and to have the features they need.
      - kepano 5mo ago
        Consider a quick search. I have answered this question many times over the years, e.g. https://x.com/kepano/status/1701359669791670416 https://x.com/kepano/status/1701359669791670416 If you look at my GitHub profile[1] you'll see that the majority of my time is spent on open source. But my priority is open sourcing the tools and libraries I would want if I were building an alternative to Obsidian (Defuddle, JSON Canvas, Web Clipper, Importer, Flexoki, etc) because I believe all software is ephemeral and that files matter more than apps[2]. Obsidian is a free app made by seven people. If we were purely financially-motivated there are many levers we could have pulled, e.g. adding feature gates, not allowing alternatives to our paid services into the official directory, etc. But as I wrote in the tweet linked above, I have spent decades making open source projects and those have never paid the bills. So yes, there is some financial motivation behind that decision. [1]: https://github.com/kepano https://github.com/kepano [2]: https://stephango.com/file-over-app https://stephango.com/file-over-app
        foofloobar 5mo ago
        I've read your twitter post. That makes sense. I've read a blog post or some kind forum thread in which it was said that the maintenance of Obsidian as an open source project would be an issue and some other similar statements. This was a while ago. Some are OK with the use of a closed source note taking app. Perhaps an enterprise version with a different feature set might be useful to companies. For notes written on my own computer, I use open source software to write and handle the sync myself.
system2 5mo ago
LMAO. That won't happen in a million years. They are bending over backwards not to give proper file access on iOS so they can sell subscriptions. Do you think they would do such a crazy thing? I bet you my life savings it won't happen.
- poulpy123 5mo ago
  They are being roasted in the comments because they give file access to the plugins, now they are bad because they don't give file access. There is no winning lmao
  - system2 5mo ago
    I O S. I O S. APPLE ECOSYSTEM. MOBILE STUFF.
UqWBcuFx6NV4r 5mo ago
you’re basically hijacking this post. this is almost entirely irrelevant. CERTAINLY highly tangential.

How would that make a difference for plugin security? Almost all plugins are already open source. If you mean for the security of the app without plugins you can currently inspect the app's code in app.js and review third-party audits: https://obsidian.md/security https://obsidian.md/security

foofloobar 5mo ago
[flagged]
- GlacierFox 5mo ago
  "Oh, please, say you want to keep it closed source because you're afraid you'll lose money and control." That's not good enough for open source zealots. That's when you end up being the headliner in an endless flood of blog posts and detailing comments telling everyone you're a 'proprietary evil man'. It's open source or nothing. And how dare you make money.
- Capricorn2481 5mo ago
  This is pearl clutching. This feels like a massive overreaction. If you don't want to use it because it's not open source, that's fine, but you're spreading a lot of snarky FUD about the creators. They are not making excuses, they stated clearly why open sourcing it is tangential to this problem at best, and they're not the only user to call out the hijacking of the thread. They have been quite clear about why they keep it closed source, so I don't know why you're making it sound like they are lying to their users. Your rant about audits has little to do with the article too. Telling everyone we're going to get rug pulled is exactly the kind of performative FUD that is meant to get a reaction more than anything. Speaking for myself, I'm going to keep using it, because nothing has come close to the convenience and performance. Would love an open source alternative to prove me wrong, but I haven't seen it.
  - foofloobar 5mo ago
    That's your opinion. I respect your choices and your opinions. I speak for myself. This is the first time I've seen this company's CEO post somewhere. I really couldn't trust this software less. To be fair, when someone comes up with excuses for not making something open source, it comes off as dishonest. Be honest. Say that you want to keep it closed to keep control and make money. There's no need to say otherwise. I do the same. I keep code private to make money. I don't say more than that. You'll see a plethora of such apps made with LLMs. People will write something custom to meet their own needs and to have the features they need.
    - kepano 5mo ago
      Consider a quick search. I have answered this question many times over the years, e.g. https://x.com/kepano/status/1701359669791670416 https://x.com/kepano/status/1701359669791670416 If you look at my GitHub profile[1] you'll see that the majority of my time is spent on open source. But my priority is open sourcing the tools and libraries I would want if I were building an alternative to Obsidian (Defuddle, JSON Canvas, Web Clipper, Importer, Flexoki, etc) because I believe all software is ephemeral and that files matter more than apps[2]. Obsidian is a free app made by seven people. If we were purely financially-motivated there are many levers we could have pulled, e.g. adding feature gates, not allowing alternatives to our paid services into the official directory, etc. But as I wrote in the tweet linked above, I have spent decades making open source projects and those have never paid the bills. So yes, there is some financial motivation behind that decision. [1]: https://github.com/kepano https://github.com/kepano [2]: https://stephango.com/file-over-app https://stephango.com/file-over-app
      - foofloobar 5mo ago
        I've read your twitter post. That makes sense. I've read a blog post or some kind forum thread in which it was said that the maintenance of Obsidian as an open source project would be an issue and some other similar statements. This was a while ago. Some are OK with the use of a closed source note taking app. Perhaps an enterprise version with a different feature set might be useful to companies. For notes written on my own computer, I use open source software to write and handle the sync myself.

system2 5mo ago

LMAO. That won't happen in a million years. They are bending over backwards not to give proper file access on iOS so they can sell subscriptions. Do you think they would do such a crazy thing? I bet you my life savings it won't happen.

poulpy123 5mo ago
They are being roasted in the comments because they give file access to the plugins, now they are bad because they don't give file access. There is no winning lmao
- system2 5mo ago
  I O S. I O S. APPLE ECOSYSTEM. MOBILE STUFF.

UqWBcuFx6NV4r 5mo ago

you’re basically hijacking this post. this is almost entirely irrelevant. CERTAINLY highly tangential.