Then why people want free software according to you? Because they like the
licensing? Or because it is not paid? No - they want it because of the
ability for community control which implies it safety.
You pretend that the free software movement believes that "free software
implies safety" so that you can then show it is wrong and conclude that the
movement fails. But the free software movement does not believe that "free
software implies safety":
It would be equally incorrect to compare proprietary software with a
fictitious idea of free software as perfect. Every nontrivial program has
bugs, and any system, free or proprietary, may have security errors. To err
is human, and not culpable. But proprietary software developers frequently
disregard gaping holes, or even introduce them deliberately. In any case,
they keep users helpless to fix any security problems that arise. Keeping the
users helpless is what's culpable about proprietary software.
https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/proprietary-insecurity.html
