timClicks

They're used by map makers to prevent other map makers from freeriding on the original work. They're less worried about personal copies and much more interested in deterring commercial reuse.

It means something, because it an iterative workflow. If you're willing to burn tokens, it's possible for weaker models to implement tasks by incrementally improving drafts.

Subscriptions are a mechanism to attract developers, who then advocate that their company should use the API.

Facebook used the same strategy to compete with Google Maps. The company became one of the biggest contributors to OpenStreetMap, which everyone has benefited from downstream.

Submitting projects like this to HN is a good way to get them nerfed.

If they're optimizing for SVG generation, then that's an excellent outcome in my opinion. Vector images shouldn't be "pretty niche".

It's an interesting example of the metric becoming a target. Simon started drawing pelicans because it wasn't something that existed before.

Another format that's worth investigating is Asciidoc. It supports the richness of Docbook XML but has fewer quirks than rST in my eyes.

Sorry if this is somewhat pedantic, but I believe that only US companies (and possibly only Delaware corporations?) are bound by the requirement to maximize shareholder value and then only by case law rather than statue. Other jurisdictions allow the directors more discretion, or place more weight on the company's constitution/charter.

Asciidoc corresponds directly to DocBook XML. They're two formats with exactly the same semantics.

MCP is an example of "worse is better". Everyone knows that it's not very good, but it gets the job done.

It's been a while since I've played in the area, but is PCA still the go to method for dimensionality reduction?

This reminds me of when I provided some impressions of Erlang as a newcomer to their mailing list.

One of my suggestions was that they include hash tables, rather than rely on records (linked lists with named key). Got flamed as ignorant, and I've never emailed that mailing list again. A while later, they ended up adding hash tables to the language.

There are a few commercially valid strategies.

1. Goodwill and mindshare. If you're known as "the best" or "the most innovative", then you'll attract customers.

2. Talent acquisition. Smart people like working with smart people.

3. Becoming the standard. If your technology becomes widely adopted, and you've been using it the longest, then you're suddenly be the best placed in your industry to make use of the technology while everyone retools.

4. Deception. Sometimes you publish work that's "old" internally but is still state of the art. This provides your competition with a false sense of where your research actually is.

5. Freeride on others' work. Maybe experimenting with extending an idea is too expensive/risky to fund internally? Perhaps a wave of startups will try. Acquire one of them that actually makes it work.

6. Undercut the market leader. If your industry has a clear market leader, the others can use open source to cooperate to erode that leadership position.