Happy to keep my underutilized subscription as long as they keep fighting ('-')7

I do wish they'd release some open model weights though. Their attitude against open weight models in general is what's keeping me from subscribing.

As the founding fathers said, "If the king comes knocking, a fight just means you're the enemy."

Not selling your services to the government makes you the enemy?

"We decided you have no choice but to build us the Torment Nexus."

Absolutely not, and it's tragic that Trump has twisted your understanding of the American government so much. It's your patriotic duty to oppose even the highest ranking government officials when they want to do bad things, and neither Congress nor the Secretary of Defense have any lawful power to stop you.

Interested to hear you cite some examples!

I believe the recommendation would be to use https://reticulum.network/manual/using.html#using-blackhole-... in such scenarios.

Unfortunately that cannot work. You don't know in advance the traffic destination or source.

Cool project, great work!

Forgive the uninformed questions, but given that `workerd` (https://github.com/cloudflare/workerd) is "open-source" (in terms of the runtime itself, less so the deployment model), is the main distinction here that OpenWorkers provides a complete environment? Any notable differences between the respective runtimes themselves? Is the intention to ever provide a managed offering for scalability/enterprise features, or primarily focus on enabling self-hosting for DIYers?

Thanks! Main differences: 1. Complete stack: workerd is just the runtime. OpenWorkers includes the full platform – dashboard, API, scheduler, logs, and self-hostable bindings (KV, S3/R2, Postgres). 2. Runtime: workerd uses Cloudflare's C++ codebase, OpenWorkers is Rust + rusty_v8. Simpler, easier to hack on. 3. Managed offering: Yes, there's already one at dash.openworkers.com – free tier available. But self-hosting is a first-class citizen.

Question: Do you support WASM workers? How does the deployment experience compared to Wrangler? If I have a wasm worker and only use KV, how identical will be the deployed worker to that of Cloudflare?

WASM is supported, V8 handles it natively. Tested it briefly, works, but not user-friendly at all yet.

OpenWorkers CLI is in development. We're at the pre-wrangler stage honestly. Dashboard or API for now, wrangler-style DX with Github/GitLab integration is the goal.

There's nothing that compels you to "purity spiral" other than attempting to appease cynics who insist that all decisions must be completely binary and consistent, with no room for nuance or practicality, and that anything else is virtue signaling (which is somehow less defensible than enabling harm in the first place).

Reducing harm where feasible is still meaningful, and certainly better than no attempt at all.

Please don't try to spread the idea that it "does not work", it's incorrect and discourages one of the most effective non-violent mechanisms consumers have for driving change in market economies. It may not necessarily be sufficient (coordinated boycotts, for instance, are much more effective than individual decisions), it may not always be an option (particularly when there aren't viable alternatives), it may not work immediately, there may not be enough people who "vote" a certain way, and there may be insufficient information to make informed decisions--but consumers absolutely decide which products and companies live and die, and every single dollar you spend allocates power.

Valve is a "flat" organization, where your compensation is determined based on peer review.

Rockstar, and owner Take-Two (largely owned by institutional investors--well known for their historical championing of workers rights and fondness of unions), both seem to have your typical corporate hierarchies, where executives are fairly and correctly compensated for being more productive than over 200 software engineers combined.

If you think one person can be as productive as 200, you're sniffing glue, my friend.

Executives make more money because they are the only ones with the power to set wages. Workers do not have the power to set wages.

Oh, I don't, I was being very sarcastic, but I appreciate that your response was so measured under the assumption that I was serious, haha.

It seems like there are a lot of people who are desperate for reality to conform to their cynicism, out of fear that they (and their world view) are part of the problem.

For whatever reason, for some it's more gratifying to see others fail to prosper if it confirms their beliefs than it is to watch others succeed and have their beliefs challenged (even if it's to their own detriment).

In many cases, I imagine those who would see themselves as "good" use their world view as a way of absolving themselves of guilt for their actions. If I believe that there was never enough for most to lead dignified lives and that society rewards only self-interest, I don't have to regret taking more than necessary, and I can justify my apathy to the suffering of others. "It is the way of things," I can think to myself, "anything else would be foolish and naive." In this way I can find satisfaction even in inequality, comforted by its inevitability--and my own cleverness in understanding it.

This is exactly it, beautifully put. It's very easy and tempting to hide behind an ideology that makes broad-stroke descriptions about the entire world. "It's just how the world works", "it's simply basic economics" (really, nearly all claims about "basic" anything with no further nuance). But for people who are entrenched in their opinions, I don't think there's a lot of absolution or guilt going on. To the most dedicated believers, the belief had become a part of their identity, so vindicating it is almost integral to their being. Of course they'd want anyone who disagrees to suffer - they don't just view that as an inevitability, but also the morally correct thing, the appropriate punishment to the people for not accepting their obvious truth.

If you have sufficient knowledge in the subject matter you're questioning ChatGPT about, you can fairly reliably discern complete bullshit from something plausibly true that warrants additional investigation (which I'd say is more useful than your typical horoscope). In isolation it seems worth the gamble to me, so long as you don't view it as much more than consulting the tea leaves.

You could also spend 5 minutes thinking instead of using a 10th of the Texas power grid to do it for you. Remember when we used to not know shit, and it would stay with you for days - before Google happened? The same is about to happen with mental acuity and AI. Use it or lose it - and I hope every fanboys' brain turns to mush before they witness irreversible AI-caused climate catastrophes solely to be able to speak natural english to a search engine. If you outsource your thinking process, don't come bitching when it's gone.

Yeah, I’m actually fairly sympathetic to your perspective, that’s why I said “in isolation”. I might think it’s possible to balance use in a way that’s not as detrimental to myself personally or others (self-hosted models, judicious use, etc.), but I definitely don’t disagree that it seems likely to do more harm than good currently.

Do you have a link to where he mentions this?