A developer that just pastes in code from gpt-4 without checking what it wrote is a horror scenario, I don't think half of the developers you know are really that bad.
> Maybe such is the destiny of foundational open source server software... If it's "cloudable" no profitable business will come out of it.
I really hope it's not true, but many clues suggest it might be.
I like the concept of open core with a very liberal license. Perhaps there should be a special "MIT-X" (an example, it would be certainly not compatible) license with a clause borrowed from that of Llama2 for large organizations, as Additional Commercial Terms [0].
"2. Additional Commercial Terms. If, on the Llama 2 version release date, the monthly active users of the products or services made available by or for Licensee, or Licensee’s affiliates, is greater than 700 million monthly active users in the preceding calendar month, you must request a license from Meta, which Meta may grant to you in its sole discretion, and you are not authorized to exercise any of the rights under this Agreement unless or until Meta otherwise expressly grants you such rights."
Nice and a possible alternative to the very polished PocketBase.
I'm working on something similar for PostgreSQL [0], with an API compatible with the excellent PostgREST [1].
I believe these tools can be of great utility in many projects and represent a generalization compared to the dedicated middleware that was popular a few years ago. Companies like Supabase are demonstrating this.
I have quite ambitious plans, even though it started as a hobby project.
In addition to the already developed DDL functionality and multi-database management, the next main features will include:
Yes, parts of this law are very likely to be struck down by the European Court of Human Rights, if a case ever gets there. Specifically the 100% automatic powers to hack and intercept anyone who is hacked by state backed hackers are pretty unlikely to be legal under the ECHR.
There is literally nothing that can win against national security as "state actors (Russia, China, even mentioned in the text) trying to sabotage your infrastructure - look we have evidence but we're not gonna share it with the public".
reply