dheatov

That's one high profile instance of human vs robot. Surreal.

If they're selling at a discount, and everyone is optimistic about the market, that's just free money for everyone else right.

They shouldn't and they won't. That will introduce a new metric -- %user disabling AI, and it will definitely be non-zero, which threatens the "everyone loves AI" narrative, which is the only thing thats floating all the tech-related valuation right now.

Now we fully understand the sustainable business model of Framework.

All party in the deal understands this. They are just convinced they will no longer be around when things go wrong, hence won't be held accountable for this particular decision.

Now Im suspecting if it's possible that VCs are part of the money loop, thus they are more than happy to fund as long as you pour enough of the funding back into the "AI ecosystem".

They used SO many words to say so little thing. At this point it seems pretty safe to say Mythos is purely PR stunt.

Why even rust at the first place? I dont see why we can't go straight from natural language -> Claude -> HTML/JS/CSS bundle. Instead of writing webpage, one can just write prompt for each page and serve it with claude.cgi

I for one am REALLY GLAD to see it consumes itself.

I did not see any based counterargument that addresses my concern.

Thanks for pointing out. So close to buying it. Would appreciate more disclosure regarding the use of hostile technology.

AI policy with AI usage is always difficult to write/read. Lengthy, frontloaded with excuses, values, and big words, followed by more words to fill the gap between sliced up ugly truth.

AI policy without AI usage is easy to read and write.

> We don't use them. That's it.

However when improved tools are obtained by these capitalists whose business model has no hint of sustainability, what's next is a modern Phoebus cartel situation where further improvement will be restricted or even prohibited to fabricate need for things like "uv Enterprise Pro".

They don't really care or like what Astral is doing right now, but they have thoughts about what they can make Astral do for them, and they really fancy those thoughts.

Assuming the actual price for many user is closer to 1k USD/mth than to 200 USD/mth, and the actual price is closer to their target margin to be a viable business, they're practically subsidising usage after 200 USD/mth. Together with other AI-TECH doing the same, they fabricate a false sense of "AI is capable AND affordable", which imo is evil.