Not really. The non-profit branch implied that the completed work will belong only to the non-profit. With open source and creative commons, ultimately the intellectual rights still belong to you; you're just letting other people use your work for free.

You also don't have to release open source or creative commons work for someone else. If you look on github, most projects are the work of individuals, and released & maintained primarily by them and not a separate non-profit entity.

TDLR the author has forgotten that you can also work for yourself for free and not just other people

The author is in the field of graphic design. It's not unreasonable that they wouldn't have much exposure to that.

I agree that open-source is definitely missing from this if it is considered from the perspective of a software developer. "Should I work for free?" is a simple and easy to remember title but it is an oversimplification when the author actually intended on it being something more like "Should I do design work for free?" That said, this was also made in 2011 and I think a lot has changed since then.

That's reasonable, but it still doesn't detract from my point that her chart is missing a really big piece.