They’ve both been working on this for a while, I’m surprised they still haven’t launched.
Domains, auth, and databases are probably the stickiest software products of all time. I suspect it’s a combo of security concerns and the risk of eroding goodwill among developers (their most important customer base rn) if they move up the stack too quickly. Once you know that the goal is to become cloud vendors, train on/compete with their own customers, and own the entire software stack e2e it’s hard to really feel grateful that they’re dragging it out but planning on doing it anyway.
For those of us working in infra/SaaS outside these companies it’s pretty clear that the only viable path that doesn’t involve getting cannibalized is training your own agents/models. The new coding agent-infra-data business model is a path towards full commoditization and undifferentiated prompting in 3-4 vertically integrated walled gardens. If you ever start making real money on pure software infra they’ll just be able to eat you alive by implementing something similar, training on their own tools rather than yours, and integrating it into their stack (which all of your customers are on already).
Also, you should only ever use $20-200/mo subscriptions on work you want them to train against or you don’t mind automate yourself out of. Think a little bit about what you’re teaching them to do when you use their products, especially if they’re the primary interface you’re working in. People are going to start caring about this a lot when the AI companies feel safe enough to begin the “extinguish” phase of AI coding. Train your own models!
I think that overlooks requirements like "absolutely ensure the end-user has to have seen and agreed to this exact text before billing them, because otherwise it's a massive fine."
Pessimistically, companies will ignore that and pick the cheapest solution and accept an unknown failure-rate that they assume will be tiny.
Optimistically, they will demand "the AI you just demo'ed, except fix whatever bug so that it never screws up." In that case, SaaS will not be about "training your own LLM model", but about investing in harnesses and rule-engines and GOFAI that constrain the actions of a not-necessarily-custom LLM which is acting as the consumer's UI or concierge. In other words.
bananaflag · · focus · HN ↗
copperx · · focus · HN ↗
weitendorf · · focus · HN ↗
Domains, auth, and databases are probably the stickiest software products of all time. I suspect it’s a combo of security concerns and the risk of eroding goodwill among developers (their most important customer base rn) if they move up the stack too quickly. Once you know that the goal is to become cloud vendors, train on/compete with their own customers, and own the entire software stack e2e it’s hard to really feel grateful that they’re dragging it out but planning on doing it anyway.
For those of us working in infra/SaaS outside these companies it’s pretty clear that the only viable path that doesn’t involve getting cannibalized is training your own agents/models. The new coding agent-infra-data business model is a path towards full commoditization and undifferentiated prompting in 3-4 vertically integrated walled gardens. If you ever start making real money on pure software infra they’ll just be able to eat you alive by implementing something similar, training on their own tools rather than yours, and integrating it into their stack (which all of your customers are on already).
Also, you should only ever use $20-200/mo subscriptions on work you want them to train against or you don’t mind automate yourself out of. Think a little bit about what you’re teaching them to do when you use their products, especially if they’re the primary interface you’re working in. People are going to start caring about this a lot when the AI companies feel safe enough to begin the “extinguish” phase of AI coding. Train your own models!
Terr_ · · focus · HN ↗
Pessimistically, companies will ignore that and pick the cheapest solution and accept an unknown failure-rate that they assume will be tiny.
Optimistically, they will demand "the AI you just demo'ed, except fix whatever bug so that it never screws up." In that case, SaaS will not be about "training your own LLM model", but about investing in harnesses and rule-engines and GOFAI that constrain the actions of a not-necessarily-custom LLM which is acting as the consumer's UI or concierge. In other words.