I think decompilers are so good, that any binary or pcode can be reverse-engineered by anyone that wants.

I generally like to open-source all my work. I'm working on a closed-source app, right now, but I think that it should be made open-source, once the embargo has passed. The backend is already open-source, as is the SDK.

I like to use the MIT license, which says that you can use the code how you like, but don't come whining to me, if you pooch it.

But I will, sometimes use a license that says "Here's the code for you to look at. It's not authorized for copying."

I think that it's a good idea to have it available. I seriously doubt there's anything in my stuff that is so proprietary that I'm afraid it will get ripped off. I do the same stuff everyone else does; maybe not as cleverly.

I just feel that it's good to show folks what's under the hood, if at all possible.

> I seriously doubt there's anything in my stuff that is so proprietary that I'm afraid it will get ripped off.

It depends. Figuring out how to design a large system still takes an appreciable amount of time even if you only end up gluing a bunch of other stuff together at the end of the day. And chances are you have something original in there somewhere. If the market is particularly cutthroat it might be a bad idea to risk giving your competitors even a slight edge.

I do appreciate the sentiment of proprietary source available projects though!

The hyperbole contributes nothing of any value to the conversation. While folks are definitely making good counter-points, I think the question needed to be asked.

I did not mean to exaggerate, just to demonstrate that in the world we live in, barriers to action are rarely physical, but moral and legal.

It's not that people do not pick locks because locks are so secure. It's because lock is polite way to say "do not enter here" and almost everyone respects that. If someone wants not to respect it, there are a multitude of YouTube channels showing how trivially easy it is to bypass it. But then, the legal aspect kicks in and punishments follow.

The same with stealing. It is trivially easy to steal. Moral code stops most people. Legal code punishes the rest.

Anything in our world can be "so easily acquired" if one does not care about laws and ethics. In that sense, the question posed in the original comment seems utterly bizarre to me. If anything that could be easily acquired were to be released for free, almost everything in the world should be released for free.