I think this is a bit of a non issue. The UI is just that, a UI. Take it or leave it. If it makes your life easier, great. If not, nothing changes about how you use DuckDB.
There is always going to be some overlap between open source contributions and commercial interests but unless a real problem emerges like core features getting locked behind paywalls there is no real cause for concern. If that happens then sure let’s talk about it and raise the issue in a public forum. But for now it is just a nice convenience feature that some people (like me) will find useful.
That's one way of looking at it. To me this UI seems like both a useful tool and an advertisement.
There's another way this could have gone. DuckDB Labs might have published the extension as providing official HTTP API for all to use. Then simultaneously MotherDuck would announce support for it in their UI. Now with access to any and all databases whether in-browser, anywhere through official HTTP API or in their managed cloud service.
I for one would like HTTP API for some things that now necessitates doing my own in Python. I don't see yet much need for the UI. I'm not looking for public, multiuser service. Just something that I can use locally which doesn't have to be inside a process (such as Python or web browser). There's such API in the extension now, but it's without docs and in C++ [1]. There's also the option of using 3rd party community extension that also does HTTP API [2]. Then there's one that supports remote access with Arrow Flight, but gRPC only it seems [3]. But official, stable version would be nice.
salesforce is a sales and marketing company first, tech company second. it's in their interest to create a ton of buzz and hype on whatever the current thing is and how they are that thing. Then they go on to sell a basic CRUD app that has to be customized by consultants.
I agree that it's not particularly surprising that if you try to trick an LLM with irrelevant text will make it perform worse.
I don't see this as an material limitation of LLMs but rather something that can be addressed at the application level to strip out irrelevant information.
Why is it a good candidate to disrupt? 1 year in, the “disruptor” would run into the exact same problems if they reach any meaningful scale or adoption.
Asking happy team members to review your company is no different than apps asking frequent users to review on the App Store.
I had a friend who actually took the “unlimited PTO” thing at face value when he was fresh out of college and joined a cool tech company. He was literally traveling every 2-3 weeks and bragging about it. He was let go for performance reasons within 6 months lol.
There is always going to be some overlap between open source contributions and commercial interests but unless a real problem emerges like core features getting locked behind paywalls there is no real cause for concern. If that happens then sure let’s talk about it and raise the issue in a public forum. But for now it is just a nice convenience feature that some people (like me) will find useful.