3 ms·
It doesn't make sense even for academia. Reproducibility is an issue and as we've seen with recent fraudulent claims in major publications - it's what is going
by orochimaaru 4mo ago
It doesn't make sense even for academia. Reproducibility is an issue and as we've seen with recent fraudulent claims in major publications - it's what is going to be used for verification of research.
Many years back while in grad school I could not reproduce a result from a paper. Thankfully they had provided the data as public but not the code. I emailed the authors and got some matlab code back. My university didn't have a matlab subscription. Octave saved me there since the syntax is similar.
But with something like mathematica and the price of it you will never be able to have a wide verification of the result if the software is not free.
Also, a lot of things in industry gain traction first in academia (especially math tools). So unless academic traction is dealt with mathematica's headway in industry will remain limited. They are still a profitable company. So I'm guessing there are deep pocketed clients who purchase the tooling.
- coliveira 4mo agoMathematica has a lot of clients in math and engineering. Traditionally these clients are not so concerned about software engineering issues you mention. What Mathematica offers also makes sense for small firms with a few engineers, because they can leverage their vast amount of ready to use functions and libraries. But I agree that for medium to large size companies it stops making sense.
- kridsdale1 4mo agoThe situation you’re describing is probably why Python is the defacto language of Machine Learning to this day.
- huhtenberg 4mo agoAs opposed to what?
- olmo23 4mo agoMathematica or MATLAB
- giancarlostoro 4mo agoI've noticed an increase in Rust, and I just googled it (for whatever that's worth) it seems to be #2 tied with C++ wont be surprised if it surpasses C++ and eventually gets tied with Python.
- pjmlp 4mo agoCUDA Oxide is only at 0.2, and NVidia has almost two decades to catch up, same with other "Python" frameworks that are basically bindings to C++ frameworks. Even the Python GPU JITs only started to be invested seriously by the big three last year. It will take a while.
- alex7o 4mo agoTrue but also for a one of piracy exists just use a cracked copy of it and be done with it
- Schlagbohrer 4mo agoHow do you run cracked/pirated copies of software? I stopped pirating software decades ago due to malware risks.
- Qem 4mo agoNot practical in research. Doesn't solve the blackbox reproducibility problem. Also it makes the act of publishing a paper under your name practically a crime confession, as it's easy for companies to comb the literature to seek people publishing results obtained with software X without a license.
- zipy124 4mo agoThis problem is very visible in Physics with software such as COMSOL, which many papers use. The licenses are so crazy expensive, that verifying any paper is difficult.
- noir1993 3mo ago> But with something like mathematica and the price of it you will never be able to have a wide verification of the result if the software is not free. This is not strictly true. The Wolfram Language/Engine is free. You can run the code in the terminal or after connecting the kernel to Jupyter Notebook. The frontend Mathematica is not free. https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/05/launching-today-free-wolfram-engine-for-developers/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2019/05/launching-today-... https://github.com/WolframResearch/WolframLanguageForJupyter https://github.com/WolframResearch/WolframLanguageForJupyter