disclosure: i run a startup that will most likely be competitive in the future.
I welcome more innovation in the code forge space but if you’re looking for an oss alternative just for tracking agent sessions with your commits you should checkout agentblame
Did you have to choose an adjective to name your product. Now it’s going to be very confusing for search engines and LLms.
“Tell me more about entire.”
“Entire what?”
“You know, that entire thing.”
Another of your competitors here. It makes me giggle that we're going after the entire developer experience while Entire is only looking at a small corner of it.
Certainly! But just to confirm, you aren't making an IDE or building a version control system to replace Git, are you? While money means you need not fear me, the scale of my vision means that I don't fear you either.
In the case where a human edits a previously AI-generated line we simply track that as a human-produced line of code. We are thinking of making this a distinct subcategory because there's a lot of useful info in that data.
Regarding performance we haven't done rigorous benchmarks but we've been using this internally and haven't noticed any problems
Do you have examples of any of these ideas being implemented? In general I agree, there’s so much opportunity for these “knowledge augmented” algorithms
Appreciate the kind words! Linear scaling in terms of speed and cost. We haven't yet optimized the prompts & choice of model to minimize token usage, so I'd recommend emailing us for advice if you want to run this on a large dataset
I used it for the last year or two at a company where all of our source control was with github. It has bindings to interact with github (not sure about what else) that allowed me to use it locally without anyone else having to change their workflows/install anything. Granted, I was mostly using it for stacked pr management among a few other things and not really fully taking advantage of all of it.
Yes, it uses Git as the default backend, so it's more or less just a different interface to a Git repository. Everyone today uses it this way.
The server-side components have been open source, but not fully usable due to fb-only code. That's changing and you can in theory build a working OSS server now that works on mysql/s3, but it isn't supported yet.
This seems weirdly hostile. He laid out a bunch of points but you’re grabbing on to this one to make it seem like he’s using classic corporate-speak. Do you find it so unrealistic that the CEO of Sourcegraph has heard from devs that their managers asked them to try to clone or investigate the product before buying? That seems pretty likely
It's both hostile and, worse, boring. I know it sucks to be intrinsically less interesting than someone you disagree with passionately, but it is the case here that the CEO of the company explaining their policy shift is much more interesting than your rebuttals, which seem superficial and rote by comparison.
Someday somebody is going to be intrinsically more interesting about, like, supporting DNSSEC than me (maybe Geoff Huston will sign on and start commenting), and I'm going to want to claw my eyes out. I have empathy for where you're coming from. But can you please stop trying to shout this person down?
If we ignore the final sentence of his reason, then you might have a point. But given his reason ends with:
> This honestly was just a waste of everyone's time.
Makes it pretty clear that the benefits to Sourcegraph (I.e. not wasting time negotiating with companies acting in bad faith), was a large part of this rationale.
Besides, if you had ever tried using the OSS version of Sourcegraph, you would realise that OSS Sourcegraph is a shadow of its enterprise version. Trust me, Sourcegraph didn’t loose any sales to people running OSS Sourcegraph, and anyone who’s willing to rip out the licensing system, so they can use the enterprise features without paying, obviously isn’t going to become a paying customer either.
Metagenomic sequencing: The field exploded after technologies and techniques were developed for using next-gen sequencing to characterize entire populations/communities of living things, first with 16S rRNA sequences, then with full genomes. The cost to do this has also gone down many, many, many orders of magnitude in the last decade or two (just search "sequencing cost graph" on google).
There's been way too many papers. Here [1] is a link to Google Scholar for 'brain gut' which turns up a zillion results. Basically, your gut biome and brain are heavily linked. As a bonus, here's [2] a search for 'glyphosate gut microbiota.' Advances in biotech/consumables and dramatic unforeseen consequences seem completely inseparable.
They are not wrong, I can attest that there have been a ton of breakthroughs and new developments. I don't know what else you're looking for here? Are you expecting them to list every single breakthrough here for you?
> While some will praise Satya Nadella and hero-worship Sam Altman, breaking OpenAI into two parts will slow down momentum for LLMs and research while handing even more power to the Cloud and Azure in its future
Except that Microsoft nor Sam is responsible for the breaking of OpenAI. It was the non-profit board. Instead now Sam and co will have access to the Microsoft war chest, funding for more compute, chip design, and datasets so if anything they’ll probably move even faster than before.
> Microsoft taking Sam Atman and his followers in, is like shutting down your best investment just for a short-term benefit. These stories don’t usually end well for big corporations.
Again this makes little sense and its very clearly obvious how this makes long term sense for Microsoft. Also they did not initiate this move by OAI
> It’s the job of Venture Capitalist to praise Microsoft, Satya Nadella, and Sam Altman to vilify OpenAI’s board in all of this.
No it isn’t
> Microsoft eating OpenAI and poaching their talent, is the worst possible scenario for the startup that was just beginning to get momentum.
No firing the beloved CEO of the fastest growing tech startup in a decade and ignoring warnings from 80% of employees that they would quit is the worst scenario for a startup regardless of what Microsoft does
This whole post seems like really bad pattern matching by someone who is anti capitalism and tries to frame every scenario they see in business through that lens
reply