I searched but could not find the "bought" or "money" or "dollar" or "stock" words in the marketing fluff piece, so it definitely does not answer the question in the title.
What was the value of the transaction?
What was the value of the transaction?
So the team is joining cloudflare...?
That's not a given as well. An acquisition usually involves restructuring the acquired company, sometimes in a way where the original team ceases to exist.
> This is what is galling. A company that can afford to pay millions for some new staff but not for what those staff built. The people who used the service, and invested their belief and time in uploading photos, or forming friendships, or logging data, are left to find new virtual homes while their former hosts enjoy a nice (if possibly delayed) payday.
> This repeated pattern only encourages more people to create flashy services that have no hope of being sustainable businesses in their own right, but may survive long enough, with VC funding, to attract the attention of a large company eager for new ideas and staff.
The last paragraph is what gets me -- it makes sense to me found startups in hopes to be acquired (continue their work with the support of a big company), but founding with the intention to abandon your users? Yuck.
I think this is being intentionally kept under wraps, so nobody who can say anything knows.
> We’ll be able to do things like run fast models on the edge, run model pipelines on instantly-booting Workers, stream model inputs and outputs with WebRTC, etc.
Benefit to 3rd party developers is reducing latency and improving robustness of AI pipeline. Instead of going back and forth with https request at each stage to do inference you could make all in one request, e.g. doing realtime, pipelined STT, text translation, some backend logic, TTS and back to user mobile device.
Hard disagree. Performance is typically the most important feature for any website. User abandonment / bounce rate follows a predictable, steep, nonlinear curve based on latency.
There's this old meme of Amazon seeing a difference for every 100ms latency and I've never seen it actually reproduced in a controlled way. Even when CF tries to advertise lower latency https://www.cloudflare.com/en-au/learning/performance/more/w... their data is companies reducing it by whole seconds. "Walmart found that for every 1 second improvement in page load time, conversions increased by 2%" - that's not steep. When there's a claim about improvements per 100ms, it's still based on averaging multi-second data like in https://auditzy.com/blog/impact-of-fast-load-times-on-user-e...
In short - if you have something extremely interactive, I'm sure it matters for experience. For a typical website loading in under 1s, edge will barely matter. If you have data proving otherwise, I'd genuinely love to see that. For websites loading in over 1s, it's likely much easier to improve the core experience than split thing out into edge.
My point about the shape of the curve stands. 100ms can matter more on the steepest part of the slope than 2s does further to the right.