You might have missed recent news about Linux maintainers being kicked off for reasons having nothing to do with Linux. This will not work across "political borders" because psychologically we're all still cavemen in need of a tribe to stick to, and a group of "them" to hate on.

That is your assumption.

> psychologically we're all still cavemen in need of a tribe to stick to, and a group of "them" to hate on.

I'm not sure this is fundamentally true, but regardless of whether it is or not, our political systems have followed an historical path of development such that it behooves political leaders to think like this, and encourage their followers to.

It works out so well for the UN!

Profit seems to be the biggest factor for efficiency

Profit is, by definition, inefficiency.

At the end of the day every employee is the most granular bit of profit-making - I trade my time and zero money for money. 100% profit.

If you removed the money you paid me could say you're being more efficient, but I don't know if that's a useful definition of efficient. Just as you could steal some raw materials and say you're being efficient.

Well yes, if you find a way to generate value with no input costs, anything you charge people will be pure inefficiency and you'll be put out of "business" by the first person who gives this idea away for free. I'm not sure what sort of insight you can glean from this.

I'm saying the input costs aren't inefficiency.

In what way? Google seems like the perfect example of profit obscuring inefficiency.

Why is efficiency the guiding metric of our decision making?

Only in a highly competitive environment.

But the browser market is not currently highly competitive.

We can't even get the world's governments to agree on what basic human rights are.

You can have country-specific nonprofits that cooperate; you can have consumer-rights nonprofits or free-speech nonprofits cooperating...

The best thing about open source is that cooperating on it is very easy.

That is your assumption.