Nor am I. I am a software developer first and foremost (I think), and I have developed my fair share of closed source as well as open source code.Basically I am not at all opposed to the idea of people making money off software and do not consider the existence of software as a product to be a bad thing.
I am very much supporting a model where open source developers do not have to "find something else unrelated to the trade to put food on the table". This is the sort of thing I am would like to avoid.Sure, open source projects would still exist. But without an entire software development infrastructure driven by paid jobs there would be far fewer developers to make it and they would have far less knowledge, free time or interest to do so on account of the fact that we would be forced to find something else unrelated to the trade to put food on the table. And frankly that is far more important than any sort of "good" that might or might not come from what I do.
I am familiar with the science model, where everything is open and everyone collaborates to get the most of what little we have. I think that woudl be a better model for pharmaceuticals and software. We could vote to make that happen.
It is more like bad deployment practices, in this and the Solarwinds one. They are inherent to closed source.And furthermore I do not see closed source development it self to be any more prone to bad development practices than open source.