Jason Antic

Scientists make their work available for others to use. Why? Doesn't it matter? Especially when we profess to be machine learning researchers (in some sense)?

You're all basically advocating for "Take what you want, take advantage of anyone who's stupid enough to make their code public, and then close off your own work so that no one can build on it." Am I wrong?

For scientists one of the rewards in this game is citations which will raise their standing and give them access to bigger grants and more interesting research. In an ever increasing avalanche of papers being published sharing the code is one way to actually get noticed.

Yep, totally different incentives, protections, etc.

Well... *dramatic flair* It sounds like I'll be the first one to break that mold, then. You can feel happy and safe that you've risked nothing to help anyone else. @quasimondo will have his art, and you'll have your business, and it'll be all to yourselves.

I've already released a year's worth of work on open source. It was pretty novel work that made several people money. @ChombaBupe is right about the idea on delayed release. I've stated that intention already. No offense but you're coming across as a zealot on this subject.

No one is telling you to open source your work. Your reasons for not open sourcing your work are invalid and make no sense. Me pointing that out and open sourcing my work is "coming across as a zealot"? Sounds like I'd rather be a zealot then.