1,761 karma · joined August 12, 2015
Compare this to an MCP, where my understanding is that the entire API usage is injected into the context.
Do websites want to prevent automated tooling, as indicated by everyone putting everything behind Cloudfare and CAPTCHAs since forever, or do websites want you to be able to automate things? Because I don't see how you can have both.
If I'm using Selenium it's a problem, but if I'm using Claude it's fine??
Does this guarantee that it functions completely with no errors whatsoever? Certainly not. You need formal verification for that. I don't think that contradicts what Simon was advocating for though in this post.
Just the keyboard. Not the entire unit.
- Someone complains about the extra restrictions imposed on AWS (lets be real, it's basically just about AWS)
- People point out that SSPL is basically AGPL+, and that for the vast vast majority of people it doesn't make any difference
- People counter that the SSPL is written ambiguously/untested in court, and so while it might seem like it's AGPL+ and doesn't matter for most users, you can't rely on that
- People complain about rug pulling (valid, IMO)
My question is this: Can there be a AGPL+ that is OSI approved? Could there be a "AAGPL" that GNU releases that covers this (very common, and IMO valid) "need" for open source companies to not be cannibalized by cloud providers?
Is this conceptually unacceptable, or is it just that the SSPL is poorly executed?
Yeah... Because massive companies use them anti-competitively as a moat against other companies, and as a loss leader to enable massive data collection and vendor lock in.
"browsers aren't really a self funding product" is a symptom of dysfunction, not the inevitable conclusion of a fair market.
What should I be searching for to find these generally?