I'm going to trust the constant stream of updates from the company itself which shows exactly what went down and came back up rather than a random anecdote.
This seems intelligent, after all companies are incapable of making errors in reporting and also have absolutely no incentive to lie about stuff like that. Those 500 errors others have reported as experiencing must have just been the wind.
Recent years have shown this to be the wrong prediction strategy. The reason seems to be an incentive imbalance where there are quite a few reasons for companies to lie (including their own CLAs) and not a lot of repercussions for doing so (everybody competes on lock-in, not on product). Of course, the word-of-mouth approach is also exploitable by dishonest actors, but thus far there doesn’t look to be a lot of exploitation going on, likely because there’s little reason to bother (once again, lock-in is king).
Officially, they're the Department of Defense. There was an EO signed last year that lets them use "Department of War" on all but their most official documents (since only Congress can officially change the name of the department).
I mean, there's a big difference between primary Git operations being down and Copilot being down. Any SLAs are probably per-service, not as a whole, and I highly doubt that someone just using a subset of services cares that one of the other services is down.
Copilot seems to be the worst offender, and 99% of people using Github likely couldn't care less.
They can stay open source, but stop putting any effort into supporting deploying to cloudflare's competitors, including accepting PRs for such improvements.
Or they could add features that only work if you deploy via cloudflare.
I also take anything said in an acquisition announcement with a grain of salt. It is pretty common for companies to make changes they said they wouldn't a few years after an acquisition.
Vercel does not make Next.js hard to deploy elsewhere. Next.js runs fine on serverful platforms like Railway, Render, and Heroku. I have run a production Next.js SaaS on Railway for years with no issues.
What Vercel really did was make Next.js work well in serverless environments, which involves a lot of custom infrastructure [0]. Cloudflare wanted that same behavior on CF Workers, but Vercel never open-sourced how they do it, and that is not really their responsibility.
Next.js is not locked to Vercel. The friction shows up when trying to run it in a serverless model without building the same kind of platform Vercel has.
Can you describe what you mean here? Because I have heard this about 100 times and never understood what people mean when they say this. I am hosting a NextJS site without Vercel and I had no special consideration for it.
Did YOU even bother to look at their site? They support more than static generation, including SSR and even API endpoints. That means Astro has a server that can run server-side (or serverless) to do more than static site generation, so it's not just a static site generator either.
And yes I can see you're posting the same lie all over the comments here.
They can say whatever they want, and then do whatever they want. They have no contractual or legal obligation.
Almost every (it seems) acquisition begins with saying, 'nothing will change and the former management will stay on'. A year later, the former managment leaves and things change dramatically.
That's always been true. Perhaps even more so as Astro constantly faced an existential battle for a working business. Now they don't have to do that and Cloudflare makes their money on their infra business. Locking Astro up now or in the future gains them very little compared to how much they make with hosted upsell services. [edit: clarity]
It's a static site builder. It creates a static site. HTML, CSS, and JS. That you can then upload literally anywhere.
Once again, what lock in? There is literally nothing to lock in. Explain exactly how they are going to lock somebody in, moreso than the lazy "for now" which you seem to constantly repeat.
And now, even if you did go over 50GB, you get 50 more GB to use at the same price. If you barely went over before, then you will likely not use up the extra 50GB, and therefore are paying less than before for the same usage.
it hinders you long term decision making and in turn makes it more likely to do risky decisions which could end bad for you (because you are slightly less risk adverse)
but that is _very_ different to doing decisions with the intend to kill yourself
you always need an different source for this, which here seem to have been ChatGPT
also how do you think he ended up thinking he needs to take that levels of testosterone, or testosterone at all. Common source of that are absurdly body ideals, often propagated by doctored pictures. Or the kind of non-realistic pictures ChatGPT tends to produce for certain topics.
and we also know that people with mental health issues have gone basically psychotic due to AI chats without taking any additional drugs...
but overall this is irrelevant
what is relevant is that they are hiding evidence which makes them look bad in a (self) murder case, likely with the intend to avoid any form of legal liability/investigation
that tells a lot about a company, or about how likely the company thinks they might be found at least partially liable
if that really where a nothing burger they had nothing to risk, and could even profit from such a law suite by setting precedence in their favor
Who, exactly, are you trying to argue against? Because nowhere in my comment did I absolve OpenAI of anything; I explicitly said multiple things can be a factor.
And, no, I don’t buy for a second the mental gymnastics you went to to pretend testosterone wasn’t a huge factor in this.
People are generally misguided about the side effects more like. High testosterone levels driving people to extreme violence or suicide is a complete absurdity to anyone with a modicum of experience.
> Use of AAS in combination with alcohol largely increases the risk of violence and aggression.
> Based on the scores for acute and chronic adverse health effects, the prevalence of use, social harm and criminality, AAS were ranked among 19 illicit drugs as a group of drugs with a relatively low harm.
It's hard to get good research data on extreme abuse of illegal drugs, for obvious reasons.
There's a correlation, but it's because violent and unhinged people are more likely to take anabolics, and certain anabolics will increase aggression, it's quite simple really. Will they turn someone from completely normal into a violent psychopath? Absolutely not, that's completely absurd. You have to be very careful with "study says this!".
Alcohol has a FAR, FAR greater connection with violence, and yet most people up in arms about "roid rage" are happily sipping away apparently unaware of the irony.
I suggested that the claim that testosterone driving people to suicide or extreme violence is absurd and your attempted refutation of that was an epidemiological study showing that testosterone users are more likely to be depressed or kill themselves… I’m not ignoring it, I’m reiterating my original point which your study doesn’t even slightly refute. Maybe I’m missing something, can you elaborate on why your study shows that it is not absurd?
I apologise for being passionate about the subject, it’s just frustrating to me that the mainstream view is so out of touch with reality.
That's ironic, as most evidence-based medicine says the completely opposite. There is a clear connection between violence and exogenous testosterone use.
There is a correlation yes. Violent individuals are more likely to use anabolic steroids. The mild increase in aggression from particular compounds isn't enough to turn someone from sane to insane or psychopathic. Be careful of studies, you have to look deeper than layer 1.
Particular steroids will increase aggression, most people avoid those ones. But they won't turn you from a normal person into a complete raging psychopath, if you tried them you would see how completely ridiculous that is. With most steroids you won't notice any increase in aggression. The reason studies show a CORRELATION, is because violent, aggressive, unhinged people are more likely to take steroids. It's really that simple.
Do you drink alcohol? Because there is a FAR greater direct connection between alcohol and violence. Maybe sit on that for a bit.
The reason we have the phrase "roid rage" is sensationalist journalism. If someone commits a crime and they happen to take steroids it's automatically labelled as "roid rage". Think about this.
If you were experienced with steroids or knew many steroid users you would absolutely not hold this opinion, I guarantee it.
reply