It's more than that. Here there's a fake demo we can only consider an advertisement. If they wanted it to be a scientific paper it should be reproducible and co

It's more than that. Here there's a fake demo we can only consider an advertisement. If they wanted it to be a scientific paper it should be reproducible and counter checked. What is the point of making a paper full of screenshot ? It's not just a knowledge for knowledge's sake issue here, it's that it's not even knowledge they're publishing. They're publishing nothing. They would make a license that says the code can only be provided for peer review and counter validation, then that'd be knowledge. Then, the sake of it is another secondary problem.