Based on the title, I assumed this would be about how the consumer could grasp and then counter-utilize the pricing differences these algorithms produce.
For example, understanding that you are being “targeted” by these algorithm for premium extraction and taking measures such as spinning up VPNs, clearing cache/history, etc to save the consumer from overpaying.
Seems like a good market for such a product would exist…
Kind of cuts against their argument that Claude is a supply chain risk. Brilliant move by Dario in allowing USG access to this - will make it difficult for the political hacks to argue about security risks at trial.
Separate from the content of the article, it’s a sad day when journalists now seem to tacitly acknowledge that their articles are essentially “I asked AI a question and here’s what it told me.”
Not so sure about this. The level of configurability in AB is significantly less than what is available in established platforms like Jamf, Addigy, etc. The AB offering seems squarely targeted at smaller orgs, and may be a great fit, but is nowhere near as mature as a midsize/enterprise customer would need.
That said, who knows where this will go in the coming years.
Agree with this 100%. The article reads as a super gatekeepy “he made different choices than me so I’m going to trash it and him” piece. The author’s perspective seems to be “how dare he use bash scripts! REAL programmers use system level languages”. Come on buddy.
Author claims there is no structure to the project but one look in the GitHub repo says there clearly is. Also, how many users will now try Arch (or Ubuntu via Omakub) as a result of this? If the answer is a positive number and DHH wants to put his time and weight behind it, that’s a good thing.
For example, understanding that you are being “targeted” by these algorithm for premium extraction and taking measures such as spinning up VPNs, clearing cache/history, etc to save the consumer from overpaying.
Seems like a good market for such a product would exist…