I would honestly feel less skeptical if this was a Show HN and the founders had just organically launched an app that did autocomplete and asked for some money to buy a license. I'd put that along side similar attempts like Xiki.
VC-backed changes it though, it feels different. It'll start with a subscription model and if this requires elevated privileges to run as what could essentially be a keylogger, it won't be long before the privacy promise goes away and the marketing team takes hold.
I'm intrigued by this but not 100% sure I follow. Is the implication that VC-backed startups are more likely to suffer from a supply-chain attack, or just more general reluctance to incorporate any new tech into the stack as it increases the attack surface area?
I'm personally reducing this surface area with clients in light of recent attacks.
Personally, something like this w.r.t. VC means that incentives will diverge and they lose touch with what it means to be a dev tool.
w.r.t. supply chain, it's probably more of a correlation (related to) that they will eventually have the large companies as enterprise customers who are the real target. Also, once making money becomes the primary driver, other important tasks are deprioritized. I've seen both the tools and their correct usage go to the wayside.
Most abstractly I think the misaligned incentives is what happens. I'm not convinced that VCs get dev tools and don't ruin them.
With this product, are their collaboration features secure? Are their servers which support that secure? You are installing a tool which phones home on each command
Why do I even want a shared terminal?
> Most abstractly I think the misaligned incentives is what happens. I'm not convinced that VCs get dev tools and don't ruin them.
I'd love to hear a little more about your thoughts here. We've committed to making autocomplete free for individuals. In your opinion, what else can dev tool companies like ours do to make you feel more comfortable?