JavierFlores09

I often tell my dev colleagues to avoid having their PC turned on all the time, be it because of the electricity bill cost, environmental impact or simply to make the longevity of the hardware a little longer. Granted almost everyone just ignores those things even if they're conscious of it, so I'd say you're right

Audio transcription is nowhere near the same as a properly written piece of text. Videos are simply a different format, and thus a lot of the communication is held by the fact that there's visual cues to go by. If one were to write an article about the same, you'd use much denser language as well as references/links around the topic. Maybe even restructure the whole thing to communicate it better through text.

It is something you can maybe whip up with the help of an LLM but then you're left wondering whether it is actually communicating what the video intended to begin with, as you wouldn't be as knowledgeable about the topic, one wouldn't be able to spot the parts where an LLM interpreted something horribly and thus reaching the wrong conclusions.

For all of the above, I do not consider audio transcript to be of any help when one prefers written content. It is useful for translation or people with hearing issues, but both of those receive help of the visual parts to convey the topic.

I don't think the realistic alternative here was “hire a team for a month and get a better semantic conversion”

For a rewrite of this size, the expensive part is deep understanding of the underlying system in order to preserve behavior while keeping performance, and above all that not freezing product work while doing it. Adding more engineers would just end up in managerial burden and review bottlenecks, to say the least.

So even assuming the API cost estimate is high, I don't buy the “just hire engineers for a month” take. A team unfamiliar with the codebase would probably spend a large chunk of that month just building context and deciding how not to break everything. A team familiar with the codebase is even more valuable doing product work, bug fixes, and review of the existing codebase.

So, in short, I do agree with the simple fact that this is still too expensive for most projects, but not with the idea that “a small team would trivially do better in a month”.

Glad I wasn't the only one, my second thought was Dual Shock controller but that wasn't it either lol

To my surprise, Movable Type is still being developed even today. Wonder if there's some companies still using it out inertia. I know many moved off of it back when they restricted their free tier

Who's to say there's no incentive. Anthropic using Bun internally is plenty incentive to make it better even if for their own use-case. I think it is a bit of a doomer perspective to think anything being bought out means the end of the line for that project. Sure, some things might change depending on the interests of the new owners but that's not to say it'll automatically become bad. Microsoft bought Github and Mojang, they're both doing better than ever for example

> The counter to that argument is that it's creating an adverse effect on your most > profitable customers, with an incentive to move to offerings that don't have free tiers (or where the free tiers are not considerably affecting your own costs).

> If your free tier is so lucrative that you need to 25x the cost, then your free tier is > too expansive and you need to tone it down until the economics make sense.

It does make sense, though. That's how almost every subsidized system works, and the benefit applies for everyone until they scale to a point where they are not legible for it. It does suck for the pool of people that just began paying the actual price of the service instead of the subsidized one, and certainly more so if they're not actually getting profit from it but then again, it isn't like they weren't benefitting from the price up to that point, otherwise they wouldn't have chosen it. Luckily enough, as far as databases go, there's a gazillion options to choose from and experiences like this are invaluable when it comes to picking one with a pricing model that fits the scaling requirements of a given project, and not only the technical merits.

Also as a side rant, I honestly don't think "projects of love" are a good counter argument to anything. They're clearly not of love because otherwise they would find a way to make them profitable. Most people are either lazy to, or lack the knowledge of how to turn their hobby into a marketable thing. Which is fine, nobody wants to deal with business when it comes to their hobbies, but one can't have it both ways. Either your hobby project gets successful and you find ways to cover its expenses, or you realize that your hobby project needs to be kept just a hobby project.