He doesn't use Octave

>he doesn't use Octave

>he's not a she

>using gnu/communism

Fuck no.

>waaah how can I be free if I have to do exactly what evil stallman says
the man simply defined what it means to be free, and considering that there's a whole organization built around it I'd say plenty of people agree with him
Also, prove him wrong, proprietary cuck

...

But I do use octave.

>the man simply defined what it means to be free, and considering that there's a whole organization built around it I'd say plenty of people agree with him

Just like all the other communist organizations!

Protip: Losing your own rights to your own work is not freedom, it's literally communism. BSD style licenses are the only truly free code.
>inB4 Bbbbut if it is free then people can take it for free and not be commies! Everything is RUINED!

>bsd are the only truly free code
If being free means I have to be a cuck then I'd rather stay with communism

>Losing your own rights to your own work is not freedom, it's literally communism
You can licence your original work with whatever licence you want. It's when you DERIVE the work that you have to licence it back with GPL. Youre not foced to use it.

When you derive, you are doing work. Work that you lose rights to. It's communism and you've been indoctrinate with mantras into thinking it's freedom.

Proprietary code has its benefits and so does OpenSource. They both have their place. If you think it should be all one way or the other you're a retard. That being said, OpenSource generally leads to much better code unless its for highly-specialized purposes. Also protip: the jew images just make you look retarded

you can always make a clean-room implementation. the GPL prevents pic related from making big money off your work without contributing back.

>Losing your own rights to your own work
Nigger, what do you mean?

Mathematics is already not copy-writable. there is much historical legal precedent declaring an algorithm as Mathematics. the only copy-writable thing in programming is the literal code itself, and if 2 people implement the same algorithm in the same language independently there is no legal conflict and either is free to release the source code.

thus, any work you do is hardly even worth copy-writing. any academic could reverse engineer and publish your work or something similar and be legally clean.

we already see this with software like Octave implementing basically every important core feature of MATLAB.

What’s that

>Nigger, what do you mean?
Why the racism?

>If you think it should be all one way or the other you're a retard

That's literally what GPL tries to do, entrap everyone into communism.

Nothing in GPL prevents anyone from selling it.

>gpl is bad because it makes you return favors for the benefit of everyone if you use the code
>proprietary is good because you can't even see the code and I have no arguments

Matlab clone that's free and compatible with matlab formats. It's alright, it tends to crash when you input a lot of values tho.

>clone
*alternative

>return favors for the benefit of everyone

This. is. literally. communism.

>proprietary is good because you can't even see the code

Proprietary code can be open source, see numerical recipes.

Also not GPL does not equal proprietary. You've been brainwashed by commies.