tukantje

How is covering obscure edge case scenarios overengineering?

I think his experience in the crypto space is part of the reason why he is against it.

Same on my side; I was constantly working and studying with 2-3 hours sleep max for years.

Life was harder. Then again nothing breaks my brain like the cry of my daughter so probably not one to one.

Cursor still has the advantage UX wise. The biggest reason I avoid using them though is their pricing structure being abysmal.

I can't randomly throw credits into a pit and say "oh 2000$ spent this month whatever". For larger businesses I suspect it is even worse.

If they had a 200$ subscription with proper unlimited usage (within some limits obviously) I would have jumped up and down though.

At the very least understanding of the specific domain comes to mind.

We have this idea that gatekeeping in all its forms is bad; and like all absolutes it is not true.

"GPL or pay" could very well be an option as well.

Small nit pick: this only works if the perpetually licensed product does not have running costs for you.

> That brings us to what training actually is, Reading. There is no requirement for attribution to read something.

> My concern is that people appear to be extending their claims to suggest that they control the right to be learned from.

Some would claim that training actually is not reading / learning but embedding / encoding. This take creates arguments like the following;

If I were to take his work and gzip it; does that mean I should be able to use it?

Why? Because this is an automated system. You are anthropomorphizing it unwarrantedly.

Not to mention usual copyright arguments like "If I memorize his code and write it on my computer by hand; can I do it now? What if I only remember 90%? 80%? What if I just change variable names?"

This isn't as cut and dry as you make it out to be, in my humble opinion.

> No more unlimited anything on the paid web, but the trade off would be that there are no more ads.

The assumption that publishers wouldn't double, or triple dip is absurd. If you've read any recent magazine you'll notice half of it is advertisement. You'd essentially end up with a paid web _and_ ads.

This is essentially a variant of tragedy of commons by this point.

Most likely reason why it'd be discontinued is that it makes rest of the ads less valuable; so to speak.

People who can afford to & are willing to pay for something like this; tend to also be the type of people advertisers want to actually target: disposable income, willing to spend etc.