The difference between open source vs. compiled closed source software in 2026 is how much time and money it takes for some faggot with Claude to steal.Open source code can get refactored and stolen in 10 minutes by the most braindead, low parameter open weight model.Compiled binaries can get stolen too but it costs several thousands dollars of frontier compute and takes weeks or months.There is really nothing to compare here, releasing open source or non-compiled software in 2026 is just retarded so just keep your code private it's that easy, if people can steal your shit with AI at least have them waste money on it.
>>110273941Copyright infringement is not a thing, nobody cares. Not in the Bible. Move on and break it freely. Cheers!/closed
>>110273948>Copyright infringement is not a thing, nobody cares.Correct, that's why I won't be releasing any of my source code.You will have to pay the full compute price without shortcuts.
>stealing open source software
>>110273941The point of open source is that people can quickly review it to see if it has bloatware, spyware, malware, or jeetware, and then they can easily modify it to fix issues or add features. It was also a big middle finger to subscription services that tried to force you to use proprietary systems.
What altchans that discuss tech have you guys been visiting? I'm getting sick of /g/ desu senpai.
>>110273977>claude git clone this repository, change variable names and do things different but not too different, use different conventions and name the project something elseJust like that your library becomes a distinct separate project, no need to credit you anywhere as it 100% belongs to me, in less than 1 hour
>>110273941No sane person should be running closed source software infested with who knows what telemetry cloud ransomware.
>>110273941>frontier computegay faggot retard shibboleth, an immediate sign to stop reading.
>>110274019Have you found any altchans that discuss tech? I've tried lainchan but the place is dead as fuck and 90% of the threads there aren't all that interesting desu.
>>110274038the only 'technology' i'm interested in is electronics and i rotate through a few forums. by and large, the internet is a wasteland of 50 IQ shit skinned mental retardation -- don't expect a miracle.
>>110273996yeah? and?
>>110273981The point of open source was to whitewash the free software movement and to preach ideas of only pragmatic values and meritocracy. Sharing and helping your friends and neighbors is an afterthought to them.
>>110274019we just need ape rape to stop being an attention whore on twitter for five fucking minutes and create /ai/
>>110274062>yeah? and?It's stolen, you and every other contributor are memoryholed.
>>110274073gaped age is an elderly shit skinned faggot retard who should be lynched. he is biologically precluded from EVER making a good decision.
>>110274083you can't steal something that's free, even if your nigger brains really wants to. certain licenses doesn't give a damn about attribution at all.>wasting tokens reinventing the wheel>on something that's already free in every sense of the wordlol okay retard.
open source was a mistake
>>110273941>stolenintellectual ""property"" isn't a real thing, you can just copy 1s and 0s infinitely lmaoget fuckt retard
>>110274132Lmfao
>>110274132>you can't steal something that's freeBut I can take away your credit.Refactoring visible open source code costs nothing.
>>110274226Who cares?
>>110274226alright then why don't you fork openssh, refactor their code, maybe even improve upon it, and steal their izzat by releasing it as your own. given you now hold the superior product, people should flock to your version in droves and forget the bsd team.should be simple really.
>>110273941closed source (commercial) software advantage isn't its existence as it's its continuous support for existing, and doing shit.think anyone is going to bother to add features and clean bugs for you, for free? from now on? those adobe clones, who gonna add the newest features and optimize them? and for what reason?you can make some open source shit, sure, but the libraries you used get updated, your build process shits itself, ton of issues are made on git, "bro not compiling I get these errors" and you gotta go see what changes broke your shit and adapt your shit so it works again, or stick everyone on some older version of the library, which now has bugs and using it gets a crypto-miner/stealer shit on your PC or whatever the fuckeven nicer open-source projects has paid code monkeys daily fixing that shit and supporting it, with funds from donations and shit, like through big funding programs. so they're still kinda like a company. but those people won't touch reverse engineered code to clone so existing commercial software.so all this shit going to stop mattering at some point, the value is in support not in the actual tool existing.thing with slop-decomp kids today is they have no discipline, they do it for the lulz and attention and they don't give a fuck about you, they care about attention like instagram femoids, mainly because they're trannies themselves anyway.so you'll again go back to classic open-source gods that work for you for free, all their lives.
>>110274286The software business was solved in the 1980's. There are two ways to make money in software - service/support, which is common for business applications. This means things like integrating/installing/training. Building out the tool within a specific company environment and getting users and processes established. Then providing ongoing support.For other stuff it's shareware. Give it away and make it easy for people to chip in. Our payment processor schemes have made this much harder than it should be today but you can find a way. I suggest using the most flexible payment tools that are out of reach of Globohomo rules. Anyway, that's all back now.
>>110273941>>110273977100% your personal project is some unoriginal crud that could be copied with a screenshot and a brief description in ebonics. and even then it wouldn't be worth the effort.
>>110274273>opensshI'm talking end products sold to customers, you are talking developer tools.I'm approaching the topic from a customer-oriented perspective of selling things to make money.You are approaching it as an unemployed tech enthusiast who doesn't profit from computers and only toys with them like a child.We can't continue this discussion any further.
>>110274312>in ebonicshttps://youtu.be/RrZlWw8Di10
>>110274344no you're moving the goalpost. you repeatedly claimed you could copy any open source project, change it around using ai and steal the original devs credit.but turns out you're a brown little bitchboy after all kek.
>>110273956It’s ok I’ll just decompile it
>>110273941>recompile your code>post it for free on github>now you cant copyright claim me because your code is not public so it was a clean room reverse engineeringOpen source makes more sense than ever now
>>110274369Yes, you can steal open source code and make it yours and completely ignore licenses without giving credit to any of the contributors, the code being legible in plain text without needing any sort of decompilation makes it a braindead task for a LLM.I already told you: I'm a serious employed adult who thinks of computers as a job, a business and money,You are an unemployed NEET who thinks of computers as ricing troonix and other meaningless shit.We both like computers but we live on two separate planes of reality, I can't discuss this topic with you.
>>110274387>put it on githubthe only dumb part of your post. github is trash and it's appalling that programmer retards have defaulted to it because apparently they don't know how to host things any other way.
>>110274286>that work for you for free,Not how it works, tell an open-source guy to add or fix something, get response "tough luck kiddo. its open source, do it yourself lolol". That's right btw. There's no actual magic here, or "discipline", you're simply skipping a step by getting Claude@github to do your feature instead of another open sourcer.
>>110274286Well put together.The fact that open source code can be refactored and stolen into a whole different library in a weekend by a DeepSeek Flash doesn't help either.
>>110274371>It's ok I'll just spend 10k on Opus tokensGo on I guess
>>110274397that's not stealing, merely copying, which is a feature of open source software and not a novel trick you've discovered using llms.and before you start repeating yourself about "muh credit", why don't you take your claim to its logical conclusion and do this with openssh? again, you would then in theory have a superior product you could sell precompiled binaries of if you so wished.
>>110274487or two hours with claudeI’ll release the copy for free too
>>110274508Data says you are lying.Most recomps are prohibitively expensive.
>>110273995the other ones are worse, I don't know if there's anywhere else to go. If anyone else has any ideas please let me know because everywhere including in real life is more insufferable than ever
