Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by natch 4380 days ago
"Try it for free"... nope. Languages should be free, period, not free for trial.
6 comments

Not to defend Wolfram, but to understand this you'll have to understand that "The Wolfram Language" is not like the traditional "programming languages". Traditional programming languages consist of a set of grammar, essential built-in libraries and a few development tools. The Wolfram Language is more than that. It includes the Mathematica language, a very rich set of libraries/algorithms, rich bodies of knowledge encoded in curated datasets in various kinds of physical and social sciences.

It might be best to compare the Wolfram Language to natural languages like English instead of programming language. The English language is not just a set of grammar, but also a rich collection of vocabularies that need to be compiled and maintained, and perhaps a rich collection of literature that need to be maintained and expanded to help learners understand the language.

Wolfram spent quite some time and resources to collect data for his Wolfram Alpha, and his new "language". It makes sense to charge money for such efforts.

It's not like every other popular language doesn't include huge rich sets of free libraries and algorithms - Mathematica has few good competitors (not none) in many math and science areas, but competitors are obviously much richer in most of the rest (which is important for a general purpose programming language). It's just that those libraries are usually spread among many open source libraries written by different people rather than being all centralized.

Based on an accounting of the work involved, it's reasonable to charge, but based on the options available (and the relative unprovenness of the Wolfram Language), it's also perfectly reasonable for people like the parent to insist on free languages only. It's what Wolfram's competing with, at least in the view of the world where it's not singlehandedly "redefin[ing] the process of programming"...

> Not to defend Wolfram, but to understand this you'll have to understand that "The Wolfram Language" is not like the traditional "programming languages".

Of course not, its a New Kind of Programming Language.

They also spend time and money keeping that dataset up-to-date.
Could you explain why you believe this and why it applies to languages but not other tools? I don't have a strong opinion either way, but to me it seems fair that people should be compensated for the innovative work they do.
I've done, and many of us do, tons of very valuable innovative work that we're not financially compensated for. There are other kinds of compensation, of course, and sometimes indirect financial benefits.

I just don't think the language will thrive as well as it could if the number of users is limited by a financial barrier. Sure, it will have users, and sure, they will find it useful, but a lot of its potential will go unrealized.

You could make the same argument with tools, so why are languages different? I think because they are more foundational.. other tools are built IN them not just using them. They become a substrate. Or not, if they're not widely used.

> You could make the same argument with tools, so why are languages different? I think because they are more foundational.. other tools are built IN them not just using them. They become a substrate. Or not, if they're not widely used.

What about the computer itself. I don't want to argue one way or the other but the hierarchy:

    Hardware (non-free)
    OS (sometimes-free)
    Programming language (mostly-free)
    Programs (sometimes-free)
seems pretty arbitrary.
I think the important thing about the language being free is that it is key enabling feature of the list you just gave. If the Wolfram Language truly was free then Wolfram Research should be able to publish and distribute a language specification and it should be possible for a competing group like, say the team that made Octave, to create a competing platform for the Wolfram Alpha language. Besides a few bells and whistles in the IDE, a piece of source code written in the Wolfram Language should be portable to any platform that implements the language specification. At least, that is what I would like.

I think the reason this isn't done is because Wolfram Research would have to really take responsibility for calling this thing a programming language. They'd have to publish their sources or at least the requirements for what qualifies as a valid source. They'd also have to publish their curating methods so that anyone with access to their sources and the language specification could produce identical results to identical source code. Basically, their position would be no more privileged than Microsoft's with respect to CSharp and the .NET framework. I don't think Wolfram Research wants to face a Mono-like competitor for their language and that is why portraying the language as some general purpose tool for everyone rings hollow.

We talk about "commodity" hardware, and I wouldn't want to program on any other kind. My computers may not be free-as-in-beer but I can buy compatible hardware from many different sources, and the standards are published so I could build my own if I had the tools to. If there were a published standard and multiple independent implementations of the "wolfram language" I'd be willing to give it a go.
Price (and the possibility of future price changes,) is just one aspect of control in walled gardens.

There are good reasons some people want to steer clear of any vendor lock-in. If there can be comparable open implementations, I'll use those. If there can't be, then the prospect is that much more alarming.

Hardware is molecules, not bits.
What's the difference, in terms of this discussion?

They both have a cost.

The difference is that bits can be copied as well as transported for almost zero cost. The same is not true of molecules.
Hardware (sometimes free)

http://www.sparc.org/

> I've done, and many of us do, tons of very valuable innovative work that we're not financially compensated for.

Arrangements in which you or others have previously engaged are not relevant, at least without an argument.

> I just don't think the language will thrive as well as it could if the number of users is limited by a financial barrier.

If this is actually your argument you should have lead with it. But it's not like Wolfram is new to the PL business, Mathematica has been pay since it was distributed on floppies and it has a large community. Making it free might make a stronger, larger community, but if you want to convince Wolfram to do that you'll need to propose a way to make up the lost revenue.

This is a platform, not just a language.

The same way that 'Mathematica' also has/is a language, but also a platform.

You can write whatever code you want, but you can only run it on their hosted platform which is not free to operate.

Ignoring all of the politics of "Free Software" and/or "Open Source Software", as a practical matter languages that are not available in no-cost implementations are rarely successful outside of very niche markets.

Though, arguably, the type of stuff Mathematica is used for is already sufficiently niche that this is less of a concern.

To be pedantic, Free/Open Source Software has nothing to do with the cost.
Except that they're not just providing a language, but a back-end for cloud computing.
I would be happy to do the computing on my own servers.
And should they give you the tera- or petabytes of data sets that constitute the actual value proposition of the Wolfram language? The data sets they keep current so when you ask for the flag of the largest country that says "good afternoon", you know you are getting the current largest country.

It seems to me that other people shouldn't demand the results of somebody else's efforts be released in any way other than the creator desires. Feel free to gather the data yourself, build a platform of your own, and then give it away, but the arrogance of expecting somebody else to do that for you is nothing short of shocking to me.

Servers include semantic update: I doubt you have the capacity to do that with the same commitment, or that Wolfram Language would make much sense without it.
OK, use something else then.
The Rasperberry PI contains a "free, period" release of the language: http://www.wolfram.com/raspberry-pi/

But no, the language is not open source, and that is unlikely to change in the future.

"Languages should be free, period, not free for trial." Why?
See my answer to tedsanders.
It looks like it is not a free trial but free with use limits.

IE You can use it for free forever, but just not too much each month. Pay for more CPU time after you hit your limit or wait until next month to get more free time.

It looks like there's also a 30-day limit on "deployments" in the free tier. It's not 100% clear to me what that means, but I'd guess it means public-facing apps built on top of the API need a paid account to deploy more than as temporary/test setups.