256DEV

Interesting question! Well no one has complained so far, but I should definitely run them all through Google Translate to see. I could see this happening quite easily.

The one issue I did have was buying a domain on Namecheap auctions only to find it had been used very aggressively by spammers before going to auction. It made me think of the recent top HN post about how you could push a suspect domain to someone within a registrar and then implicate them without their knowledge. The Namecheap auction system happily let me buy the domain, but then as soon as it was in my account it got suspended and I got various emails from their security team about how many blocklists it was on and how I'd have to submit extensive documentation to get it unsuspended etc. Thankfully the support was helpful and now I check domains more thoroughly before I buy them...

Well well, I did not know that.. Thanks for expanding my vocab! Maybe a better example would have been the similar Zuora!

I can confirm the VAT handling works really well and I even have customers thank me for supporting VAT properly. Particularly EU customers that have higher expectations for this compliance. My original reason for starting to use Paddle for my SaaS was actually just because Stripe wasn't available in my country and I'd prefer anything to PayPal/2Checkout, but now after approx. 18 months I don't think I'd switch if Stripe launched here tomorrow.

They've also added an "Invoicing" system now so we can also be as easily VAT compliant for enterprise deals that will only pay by wire.

Impressive project, nice work! I'd use the `outdated` command but even just the basic listing of installed packages across all managers looks useful to me.

It's a move in the right direction but I can't help but feel that this is an example of a massive corporation getting ahead of regulation with a watered down version of right-to-repair than Apple suddenly having a genuine change of heart...

That said, my sincere hope is that this move doesn't dampen enthusiasm amongst people considering switching from Macbooks to Framework laptops. We desperately need a computer manufacturer that puts repairability at the core of their design process and Framework has made such a high quality start that it even with their first attempt it doesn't feel like a compromise!

If you care about really owning your device and being able to repair it take a close look at the caveats Apple may include in the actual details of this programme versus with Framework.

Basically I understand the idea of serverless in this context as abstracting away everything related to managing & maintaining the database - i.e. anything like VMs, containers, OS, DB processes etc.

So you can set up a PlanetScale MySQL DB and use it just like a normal instance of MySQL, but also keep adding data from one small set of records all the way up until you have gigantic petabyte volumes of data without having to do anything beyond sending the data through your MySQL connector.

In theory it should just keep working in a performant way from 100 user records for your new startup to the scale of running parts of Slack. No choosing bigger and bigger AWS RDS instances as you scale, no need for autoscale strategies in case of traffic surges or worrying about replicas for perf etc. etc.

As someone who is honestly quite resistant to parts of the serverless paradigm this offering actually appeals to me. I prefer running my own fleet of VMs and traditional PHP/Nginx type stack but have already moved to AWS RDS to abstract away some of the replication complexity required to achieve high availability DB with minimum hassle. This seems like the logical next step and despite being allergic to kind of hype you mention finding this is something I'd definitely try out before moving other parts of my infrastructure onto anything like Lambda.

I hate to be the stereotype of skeptical HN reader but I think this headline oversells the article.

Specifically for me it doesn't speak at all to the differences between starting a SaaS like this as a team of founders versus as a solo founder. As a committed solo founder all I can say is that choosing solo founding is not something to be undertaken lightly!

My startup CV is now roughly an equal length of being on a team of 4 founders and the current solo founder situation so I see the differences all the time. There are a lot of positives to both options but to write an article like this and not blend an awareness of the trade-offs between the two makes it much less interesting.

I've really struggled with being a solo founder despite it being a strong preference and learning to face every aspect of the running the business with a very conscious awareness that you're +1 in certain things and -1 in others is the only way I've found to make it work.

The idea you choose is a big part of this. I've seen thinking about your idea & solo founding preference described on twitter by @warikoo like this:

2x2 matrix

X-axis: Do you have the core skill reqd for the startup? Y-axis: Are you a control freak?

Y,Y: DON'T have a cofounder

Y,N: Could get one, but with complementary skills

N,Y: Hire people, might make them cofounders later

N,N: You have to have one!