As a big fan of the whole Foundation saga, I don't remember any wars in "Robots and Empire" 3 books. Granted, those were the only books I've read only once (and a long time ago), but I'm pretty sure there was no war.
The way the most recent season of the show ended it looks like humanity may have been misled about the war, so it may end up fitting that more closely once they're done (I haven't read any of the books, just going on your comment).
So when would that be exactly? Firefox was first released in 2004 and Mozilla Corporation was founded in 2005.
According to https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share#yearly-2014-... the high point for adoption was 2010 and it has been falling since then. (However, they only have data from 2010 onwards, so the high point could have been even earlier.) This coincidentally [sic] aligns to the launch of Chrome with a massive marketing push in 2008, promising speed, ease of use and security.
I find it hard to believe that there are enough people who closely follow the drama around the internal financial management and politics of Mozilla Corporation that they can be measured in the tens of percentage points of total internet market share.
There are a lot of posts from prominent open source maintainers about this topic and from a far away, I always wonder if the solution is actually simpler than they want to admit: treat the project like a real business.
`curl` (and similarly important projects) have a tremendous leverage with the big tech and I don't see any of them on curl's sponsors page. Why not?
The sales pitch (and yes, treating the project like a business implies sales) would be simple: we are curl, you depend on us, pay us 1M/anually and with that money we'll hire the experts that we need to continue the development and support of the project. Raise a few millions (recurring) and secure the project's financial stability. Pay yourself a respectable salary, hire people.
If "the big tech" refuses, publicly call them out on it. Connect with other prominent projects and act together. The internet depends on you, you should be awarded.
I have a tremendous respect for curl as a project and Daniel as a person (based on his writtings, never met him) and I know it's easy to comment out the stuff on the internet from a safe distance, but I still wonder if things could be actually different.
> The curl project is not owned by a company. We are not part of any umbrella organization. This makes us a little under-powered at times, but it also gives us maximum freedom and flexibility. We act solely in the interest of making curl as good as possible for the world and curl users.
That interest could also be served through a dedicated curl entity, with the right legal structuring.
So, Anthropic acquires Bun team because claude-code uses Bun. They port Bun from Zig to Rust presumably because Rust "is better" (imagine big air quotes here). Again presumably, they want to make claude-code "better". Why make it so complicated? With all the power of LLMs they have, surely they can make claude-code the best possible by writting it in Rust directly.
Presumably they aren't falling for their (extremely obvious) "grassroots" marketing, and know, like any good engineer, that LLMs are not the right tool for this.
It's easy to just see Bun as a marketing stunt, as well.
Are you replying to the wrong comment? I clearly quoted which part I were replying to. I didn't attempt to answer the question "why write Bun in Rust when CC itself can be written in Rust."
What I said is that "they know that LLMs are not the right tool for this" is not the answer, as CC is already vibecoded so it'd be very weird to believe you can't vibecode a port of CC.
The actual answer is, of course, the whole discussion is just making a hill out of a mole. Bun is not committed to a Rust rewriting, vibed or not.
reply