Top
Best
New

Posted by misswaterfairy 1 day ago

OccupySaaS(occupysaas.com)
514 points | 312 commentspage 4
peter_retief 1 day ago|
You need to take it a step further and control the so called "cloud" by using this shared self reparing mesh.

https://github.com/peterretief/yggstore

I am using it for hosting at the moment, there needs to be a greater adoption and then the developent will be back in the hands of the developers

misswaterfairy 1 day ago||
Is this Big Tech's 'We demand you use AI! Noooo, not like that! moment?
0c3ca83 1 day ago||
No, this is big tech slobbering at the idea of pivoting to selling AI infrastructure, and eating medium tech's lunch.

If the whole thing wasn't so harebrained, I would suspect it was a marketing campaign from Anthropic.

antonvs 1 day ago||
Let me get this straight, you’re implying that Anthropic’s other marketing campaigns, like “AI will probably hack all our systems and then kill us all” is not harebrained?
0c3ca83 1 day ago||
They seem to believe that one. I suspect extreme harm to human well-being is far more likely.
antonvs 1 day ago||
I'm skeptical that they really believe it - at least, not the people at the top.

There's no question that AI can, and almost certainly will, be used to do great harm, but the idea that AIs are just going to up and decide to kill us on their own is unlikely fanfic at best.

And at worst, it's projection by people who are really telling on themselves about what they want to do to anyone they consider either useless or a threat. They're also thinking of the consequences of the way they plan to use AI themselves.

They read or watched "Ender's Game" and thought it was a model for how to deal with competition. Or, as we see with Thiel for example, they read Lord of the Rings and thought "Sauron did nothing wrong." Or in Musk's case, substitute Sauron with the guy whose salute he likes to copy.

I realize neither of those people are really central to the AI race, but they're symptomatic of the thinking of the cult. In the 1980s, the people who deluded themselves that they were "masters of the universe" were on Wall Street. Now, they're in Silicon Valley.

In fact, if AI were to turn on its creators, we might end up with the best of all possible worlds.

MentalM 17 hours ago||
[dead]
bakugo 1 day ago|||
No. Some people want it to be, but it doesn't take a lot of thinking to understand why "we got fired from big tech because of AI, so now we're fighting back by funding said AI out of our own pockets" makes absolutely no sense.
ragequittah 1 day ago|||
Anthropic seems to be leaving lots of money on the table because it made enough sense that they got pressured into putting up guardrails against it.
bakugo 1 day ago||
Performative "guardrails" consisting of a single vague and easily bypassed prompt. It hasn't stopped anyone, and likely only serves as future legal defense in case of a lawsuit.
byzantinegene 1 day ago|||
exactly, do the people behind this not see the irony of this movement?
Haven880 1 day ago||
This put a cap on the upper price. Basically it forced the SAAS pricing to dive similar to what Deepseek is doing to OpenAI and Anthropic. Easily 30% of any SAAS are not companies. So over time that portion will not grow and chip away. And further more this encourage other smaller companies to vye for the same enteprise customers forcing the price to dive further. I dont expect the current SAAS to continue much. It willturn more of personalization service in coming decade.
RomanPushkin 1 day ago||
Vote for JIRA: https://github.com/occupysaas/website/issues/7
hypfer 1 day ago||
This genuinely feels either misguided or like a false flag psyop that will end in harm to the goals of the common people.

Possibly also a PR stunt

neya 1 day ago||
Most of the organizations that are successful are so because they had a coherent vision for what the product would be and a passion for solving that particular niche's problem. I'm not sure how anger/vengeance rather than a passion for the problem space is going to positively change the customer's perception of the product's long term vision, support and guarantees. Imagine trying to poach a Salesforce client and they ask you why would they need to invest time and money into migrating to your solution and all you got is "haha, fuck salesforce, they fired me".

The idea seems noble, but a good market-fit product is more than just code sitting inside a github repository. That's why there have always been open source alternatives to commercial CRMs long before AI even came into the picture but they never took off.

avaer 1 day ago||
Products get successful by being good, but after a certain threshold people buy a product because "nobody got fired for buying Salesforce". Which is not all that different from buying a product because "haha, fuck salesforce, they fired me".

You probably don't intend this, but the argument seems like "money talks, so why bother with ideals". How would you solve enshittification in the current market, if not introducing a bit of anarchy?

ivanmontillam 1 day ago|||
> Products get successful by being good,…

Products get succesful by fitting the requirements/wants/desires of paying customers, regardless of quality or even usability.

Same reason JIRA still lives, even when it's our favorite product to hate.

neya 1 day ago|||
> "money talks, so why bother with ideals"

That's definitely not what I'm saying. I'm just saying build a better product and a better company that focuses on its employees. It's not that hard and there are plenty of examples all around. Also, revenge isn't exactly an ideal, it's actually quite the opposite.

andyhoward 1 day ago||
[flagged]
returnInfinity 1 day ago||
this fine, but don't forget to hire the laid of sales and marketing folks. without them, this is going no where.
moezd 1 day ago||
I think we can make it sharper by not only 1:1 copying it, but focusing on a specific use case that bugs people. How about a backend-only replica that solves Terraform-specific bugs and makes a 1:1 compatible API that feels like a breeze? Then users can slap their own UI on top and basically own the product.
andruby 1 day ago|
I love this from a societal point of view.

However, I believe Service-as-a-Software has a more powerful future. Business pay for shifting a problem to someone else (like hosting, or accounting, ...). The software isn't the solution, it's not what's valuable, the service is.

More comments...