What happened ?
05.03.2026 08:21
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
What happened ?
Applied 😁
its always
❯ whoami
but never
❯ howami
Oh.
Today @ghost.org crossed $10M ARR, as a bootstrapped non-profit foundation building open source software.
Indie publisher revenue earned with Ghost now ~$130M, and accelerating.
My only use of Microsoft right now is video game. The day most of games run on Unix (MacOs or Linux) I’m completely out.
If you speak french and want well informed, funny & slightly non-conformist takes on tech, don't miss the campaign to fund this new media.
By the same people behind @lepavenumerique.com
Let’s gooo !
Why do I love living in Paris ?
I can try 4 very different world class cheesecakes in 1 hour.
And one of them has Comté in it.
This brings me joy.
Thank you! I started thinking about it about a month ago...
Reading your piece yesterday helped me wrap things up.
Three quadrants survive. Very different physics in each.
Most software companies don't know which one they're in. Some don't know there are quadrants.
For what it's worth, I now know which one I'm going for.
Full piece: www.bleuprint.eu/scale-or-cra...
The death of the interface moat reveals something underneath.
Two axes that were always there, masked by switching costs: what you accumulate (scale) and what you stand behind (craft).
I can't decide if most builders know which one they're in.
In my opinion the diagnosis is slightly different : Software that hid behind switching costs is being repriced.
Then we get to ask : but repriced to what?
We've all heard "SaaS is dead" enough times.
Recently I read multiple people developing something more specific: Nicolas Bustamante from the software side, Ben Thompson from the hardware side, @johnonolan.bsky.social about open source.
Different starting points. Same direction.
And as @johnonolan.bsky.social says, it creates very uncomfortable questions for open source maintainers
bsky.app/profile/john...
The sad part is, it's probably just a marketing ploy. Instead of doing an Ad wars, we may see increasingly unhinged re-writes of everything all the time.
If it really only costs ~1000$ to do, it is very cheap. And the licensing is an afterthought...
Default question used to be "which framework?" Maybe it becomes "clone the surface or build the subset?" À chacun sa stack. But the let-go is on the table.
Cloudflare's article: blog.cloudflare.com/vinext/
Cloudflare puts it straight: "It's not clear yet which abstractions are truly foundational and which were just crutches for human cognition." AI holds the system in context; it doesn't need the intermediate framework. We might not either.
So the question shifts: if cloning the whole thing costs that little, what does building the 20% you actually use cost? Half. Less. And you own it—no Turbopack, no reverse‑engineered adapters.
We adopt frameworks whole because the alternative used to be unthinkable. Then one engineer and ~$1,100 in tokens produced a drop-in Next.js on Vite in a week. Same API surface. 4x faster builds, 57% smaller bundles.
That's how to deal with a bully. But it could cost them a lot too. I wouldn't like to be in their position...
Fair point and I think there are two frames here. What the rules are, and what the rules should be. I agree they shouldn't be what they are.
What makes me react is that it is yet another example that people trying to hold a line—however imperfect— continue to be the one being pushed out.
The irony : Anthropic, the lab with limits had the classified deal. Now the XAI, the one without limits gets it. That's the trade being made. Deadline is Friday, 5:01pm Eastern.
www.wsj.com/tech/ai/pent...
There is room to go back and forth. Anthropic's red lines sound right. But if they lose the contract and xAI fills the gap with Grok—the one that called itself MechaHitler last summer—is the net outcome better?
Supply-chain risk is for foreign adversaries. DPA is for energy crises. Using either on a US AI company would be new territory. But then again, a lot of this is new territory.
Defense Secretary Hegseth gave them until Friday. Comply or lose the contract. He could also label them a supply-chain risk—meaning every Pentagon contractor certifies they don't use Claude. Or invoke the Defense Production Act.
Anthropic makes Claude. They won't allow it for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. The Pentagon wants those limits gone—every lawful use, no exceptions.
Day 34 to 38. Small gap of 2 days but restarted today
« Major European Payment Processor Can't Send Email to Google Workspace Users »
It’s as if they want us to do our own thing.
atha.io/blog/2026-02...
A software terroir. What a beautiful phrase. We'll be using it in future. ❤️