3 ms·

Can you suggest a viable infrastructure alternative? My wishlist: free for open source and paid for closed source, able to do simple projects that are handwrit

by jph 2mo ago

Can you suggest a viable infrastructure alternative? My wishlist: free for open source and paid for closed source, able to do simple projects that are handwritten and also complex projects including AI LLM code that needs CI/CD/auditing, and hosting in the UK or EU. Aside, I donate money to Codeberg because I think Codeberg is a wonderful service with strong commitment to free open source, and because I host some larger projects and AI projects that are for public welfare social good.

icy 2mo ago
https://tangled.org https://tangled.org would love to have you :) We're hosted in the EU, and are free for open source, forever. Tangled is also designed to be federated from ground up, so you get to own your infra & data while still participating in an open network.
- jph 2mo ago
  Thanks! Added. What is your donate link? https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/architecture-decision-record https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/architecture-dec... https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/ways-of-working https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/ways-of-working https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/coordinated-vuln...
  - TimTheTinker 2mo ago
    Tangled is a VC-funded Oy (Finnish limited liability corporation, €3.8M seed a few months ago). I searched and couldn't find a published donation route, which makes sense given it's VC-funded. To Tangled -- it's great that the core code is MIT licensed and anyone could stand up a competing appview (the credible-exit property of atproto). Do Tangled Labs Oy's articles include a purpose clause instead of the default profit-only purpose[0]? Or is something similar on the roadmap? [0] OYL 1:5 reads The purpose of a company is to generate profits for the shareholders, unless otherwise provided in the Articles of Association.
- crote 2mo ago
  What is the long-term sustainability story here? You're deliberately avoiding a network effect lock-in by being federated, you make competition trivial by giving away not only the protocol but also making your code available, and you don't even restrict commercial competition by using the MIT license rather than, say, BSL. To me that sounds like you are deliberately starting a race-to-the-bottom competition on price with, well, everyone capable of hosting a SaaS? Heck, if you don't end up with some solid competition the whole "federated code" USP doesn't play out. To me that doesn't exactly scream "good return on my €3,8M seed round". Am I missing a brilliant plan here, or should we expect a rug pull a few years down the line?
chilmers 2mo ago
I feel like any service that is free for open source is going to struggle if it gets significant adoption and becomes a default target for hosting LLM generated code. If even MS/GitHub cannot scale to the current demand, what hope do smaller and less well-funded alternatives have?
- voidnullvalue 2mo ago
  Rate limiting the infrastructure-hammering actions (mainly CI stuff) would be a reasonable method to handle this.
  - wyclif 2mo ago
    Doesn't GitHub already do this? (I don't know if they do or not; just wondering).

by jph 2mo ago

icy 2mo ago

https://tangled.org https://tangled.org would love to have you :) We're hosted in the EU, and are free for open source, forever. Tangled is also designed to be federated from ground up, so you get to own your infra & data while still participating in an open network.

jph 2mo ago
Thanks! Added. What is your donate link? https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/architecture-decision-record https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/architecture-dec... https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/ways-of-working https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/ways-of-working https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure https://tangled.org/joelparkerhenderson.com/coordinated-vuln...
- TimTheTinker 2mo ago
  Tangled is a VC-funded Oy (Finnish limited liability corporation, €3.8M seed a few months ago). I searched and couldn't find a published donation route, which makes sense given it's VC-funded. To Tangled -- it's great that the core code is MIT licensed and anyone could stand up a competing appview (the credible-exit property of atproto). Do Tangled Labs Oy's articles include a purpose clause instead of the default profit-only purpose[0]? Or is something similar on the roadmap? [0] OYL 1:5 reads The purpose of a company is to generate profits for the shareholders, unless otherwise provided in the Articles of Association.
crote 2mo ago
What is the long-term sustainability story here? You're deliberately avoiding a network effect lock-in by being federated, you make competition trivial by giving away not only the protocol but also making your code available, and you don't even restrict commercial competition by using the MIT license rather than, say, BSL. To me that sounds like you are deliberately starting a race-to-the-bottom competition on price with, well, everyone capable of hosting a SaaS? Heck, if you don't end up with some solid competition the whole "federated code" USP doesn't play out. To me that doesn't exactly scream "good return on my €3,8M seed round". Am I missing a brilliant plan here, or should we expect a rug pull a few years down the line?

chilmers 2mo ago

I feel like any service that is free for open source is going to struggle if it gets significant adoption and becomes a default target for hosting LLM generated code. If even MS/GitHub cannot scale to the current demand, what hope do smaller and less well-funded alternatives have?

voidnullvalue 2mo ago
Rate limiting the infrastructure-hammering actions (mainly CI stuff) would be a reasonable method to handle this.
- wyclif 2mo ago
  Doesn't GitHub already do this? (I don't know if they do or not; just wondering).