• HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    You can copy binary code. Just as easy as source code.

    It is only when running on a different architecture it gets a bit more complex.

    And give the binary is directly translatable by software. Not hugely more complex for any company of the size you are unwilling to fight in court over open source code.

    Sorry but no you are wrong. Hading the source in no way makes code harder to copy. Its how most of us hacked into games in the 1990s.

    After all binary code is just simpler instruction set that takes very very minimal effort to convert into assembly language. And can be read by many even without that effort.

    Its hardly a secret encrypted format. (Unless you are also designing your own hardware and not letting anyone see that. )

    • refalo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I think we majorly disagree on the definition of “harder” and “just as easy” here. I don’t consider that making me “wrong”, I consider it a difference of opinion. One could argue that it is indeed harder to copy assembly code especially when you do not understand it, or like you contradictingly already stated, when the architecture differs. I was speaking in the context of “the general sense of people casually copy/pasting source code” which I was also implying that meant that those people also did not easily understand assembly already. Sorry for the confusion.