>My concern is mostly financial.

Then AI will eat your lunch anyway if the financial part has anything at all to do with the code.

AI can decompile code very well.

have you like used AI? it's barely usable for anything other than grunt work. You actually have to tell the truth for the cynical but correct trope to work. If it's about now might be time to re-calibrate the hype, if it's about the future, well then there the worst case scenario is far worse than the worst case scenario cynics and LLM company CEOs talk about, human extinction is really the medium bad case if they actually manage to create AGI.

> My code is perfectly secure and bug-free.

I mean, bold statement but statistically speaking it's almost certainly incorrect. I will say that, irrespective of whether source is open or closed, I would be deeply skeptical of a project that made this assertion.

I assumed they were trying to be humorous . Although I find that type of humour obnoxious enough that it would put me off the project.

I gave it a good minute of reading and re-reading because I thought it SURELY was meant tongue in cheek, but I couldn’t make it work.

Maybe I was being too generous - jongjong seems cynical and old enough but can't read similar "humour" from others: https://hackertimes.com/item?id=47426320

I previously failed to summarise HN guidelines on sarcasm: https://hackertimes.com/item?id=38585465

Humans are fine, the problem is your worth.

I mean that's fair enough but I don't think one person keeping their code closed source really changes all that much. And it depends on what your software does, no-ones out there really replacing (while actually saving any money at least) anything complicated with vibecoding, and GPL violations already happened before.