> The license entitles you to receive lifetime updates for the major version. When we release the next major version, you can optionally renew the license.
Fairly common. JetBrains started that way too. Will they one day have a major version that's using a subscription model? Perhaps. But they will likely not regret this too much.
Insert some convoluted argument about new versions being "new versions" and not updates, so one is not entitled to them ;-) , just like politicians argue things like genocide not being genocide.
I hate the subscription model but I do recognize if they continously update the software, they'd like to get paid to do so.
> I've seen most of them moving to internally signed certs
Isn't this a good default? No network access, no need for a public certificate, no need for a certificate that might be mistakenly trusted by a public (non-malicious) device, no need for a public log for the issued certificate.
Yes, but it is a lot more work to run an internal CA and distribute that CA cert to all the corporate clients. In the past getting a public wildcard cert was the path of least resistance for internal sites - no network access needed, and you aren't leaking much info into the public log. That is changing now, and like you said it is probably a change for the better.
Not everything that's easy to do on a home network is easy to do on a corporate network. The biggest problem with corporate CAs is how to emit new certificates for a new device in a secure way, a problem which simply doesn't exist on a home network where you have one or at most a handful of people needing new certs to be emitted.
I think you're being generous if you think the average "cloud native" company is joining their servers to a domain at all. They've certainly fallen out of fashion in favor of the servers being dumb and user access being mediated by an outside system.
I think folks are being facetious wanting more for 'free'. The solutions have been available for literal decades, I was deliberate in my choice.
Not the average, certainly the majority where I've worked. There are at least two well-known Clouds that enroll their hypervisors to a domain. I'll let you guess which.
My point is, the difficulty is chosen... and 'No choice is a choice'. I don't care which, that's not my concern. The domain is one of those external things you can choose. Not just some VC toy. I won't stop you.
The devices are already managed; you've deployed them to your fleet.
No need to be so generous to their feigned incompetence. Want an internal CA? Managing that's the price. Good news: they buy!
Don't complain to me about 'your' choices. Self-selected problem if I've heard one.
Aside from all of this, if your org is being hung up on enrollment... I'm not sure you're ready for key management. Or the other work being a CA actually requires.
Yes, it's more work. Such is life and adding requirements. Trends - again, for decades - show organizations are generally able to manage with something.
Adding machines to a domain is far far more common on bare-metal deployments which is why I said "cloud native." Adding a bunch of cloud VMs to a domain is not very common in my experience because they're designed to be ephemeral and thrown away and IPA being stateful isn't about that.
You're managing your machine deployments with something so
of course you just use that
that to include your cert which isn't particularly hard but there's a long-tail of annoying work when dealing with containers and vms you aren't building yourself like k8s node pools. It can be done but it's usually less effort to just get public certs for everything.
Is B Corp a real thing? It's not equivalent to non-profit and they can always stop being B Corps. Wikipedia lists Nestle Nespresso as a B Corp example, not very inspiring.
Same features, including Netlify DNS. You can also choose to remain on the Starter plan, which has traffic overage billing, by entering a payment method.
When you exceed the limit, your Netlify-hosted sites are suspended until the end of the month. Netlify DNS remains operational, as we're aware that people operate non-Netlify infrastructure, such as email, that relies on it.
To you and GP - I think the original title was misleading, and I tried not to and hope I succeeded in not editorialising. Editorialising is injecting personal opinion instead of focusing on the facts, which is the opposite of what I did. I removed the misleading ambiguity and instead stated as clearly and shortly as I could the essence of the story.
The original title leaves open the idea that this decision doesn't have a precedent which it is overturning, which is unnecessary and misleading. And the original title strongly implies that the recent revelation from Meta only relates to the U.S., which similarly is not true and is misleading.
For a U.S. audience that might seem to make sense, but HN has international readers.
The decision on the title was already made - in the source. Unless the source violated HN guidelines, its title should be kept as is and not "improved".
The chat on the website is not their main product... They're selling access to their models to enterprises. As sickened as you are by having to log in to the chat, that's not an indication of their success at training and marketing high-quality models (the only real competition to OpenAI at this point).
> The chat on the website is not their main product
Guess what: enterprises are made of people. People like to try things out. If people are not happy with something for their personal use, they most definitely are never going to recommend it to their employer. This is why OpenAI wins. It is in fact one of the factors that sets apart a hyper-successful product from a wannabe.
Literally every single person I know who’s building anything in AI (dozens of early stage founders) prefers Claude over GPT at this point.
The AI emperor will not be the one who has the most consumers logging into product.com to use the chatbot.
Compound this with OpenAI’s continuous shedding of, as far as I can tell, every credible researcher… I find your position quite hard to believe, even accounting for the hysterical tone.
> Literally every single person I know who’s building anything in AI (dozens of early stage founders) prefers Claude over GPT
I don't believe this at all. I am not here to argue that Claude is a worse model, only that Anthropic is a worse company.
> The AI emperor will not be the one who has the most consumers logging into product.com
Your point only goes to show how much Anthropic hates its end users.
> OpenAI’s continuous shedding of, as far as I can tell, every credible researcher
OpenAI has zero trouble hiring great talent. As I see it, they lost a lot of dead weight that had no interest in bringing AI to the masses, but had an agenda of their own instead.
Huh? How so? Sorry not even clear what your complaint is… is it the Firefox (3% market share) login bug? The Claude chat experience has been superior for a while now, and Projects and Artifacts make it 100x so.
Good at hiring and bad at retaining is much worse than the reverse, especially for long-lived R&D projects.
It's that, but it's more. They promise API credits to try out the API, but then refuse to give any credits. Overall, it's as if they don't care even a little bit for individual customers.
It is unfortunately not failing them ("unfortunately" because I very much dislike the path they took). They lost Heroku, which also didn't pay them before the license change, but they got others. I don't know if the information is public.
I'm torn on the moral issues of the re-licensing, but I'm firmly happy about the practical implications. Redis vs. Valkey is as competitive as it gets, since users can switch between the two so seamlessly (for now, at least). That's good for the industry. I expect to see a flurry of improvements to both in the coming years as they try to come out on top (some may be redundant, but I nonetheless think the pace will be faster).
Yeah, I guess I'm speaking from a sample size of 1 here since they don't share this information (and I'm too lazy to look around at what other cloud vendors are doing i.r.t. Valkey vs Reddit).
Fairly common. JetBrains started that way too. Will they one day have a major version that's using a subscription model? Perhaps. But they will likely not regret this too much.