That’s the beauty of totally arbitrary restrictions, you can change them as you want.
Pay by seat? Pay by client? Pay by byte of data stored? Pay by backup location?
… pay by moonphase? Pay by AI personality? Pay by virtual AI seat?
Such BS but why wouldn’t Microslop extend its business model. It worked well so far. It’s not about software, or datacenter, or AI, it’s just about entrenchment.
How many of those 8 are doing anything, ANYTHING, about it though?
AFAICT its creator it’s entirely focused on the mobile challenge know, working on /e/OS for his Murena company.
Yes, I didn’t know the expression “local rewrites” but that seems to capture it well.
My bet it’s another version of the inverse of Not Invented Here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here where the IT department or a random manager claims that whatever was generated is “theirs” implying agency. They don’t realize that each iteration will get harder and more expensive (bigger context window) while alternatives have accumulated thousands and thousands of “bugs” or even just usage highlighted limits of their implementation. So they are re-inventing their version at great cost and in the end the difference between what they worked on is basically equivalent of open source equivalents but with no community support and instead a dependency on models and infrastructure they don’t own.
Maybe but that wasn’t my point. My point is that a lot of people now invest a LOT of resources, being token, money, time, etc to invent the wheel again. Instead of relying on e.g. Drupal they’ll “generate” yet another CMS which will work (for a while, in theory) not because it’s a good idea (IMHO it’s not) but because it’s been marketed as doable and even “better” on some aspects (e.g. customizable).
And that’s why GenAI for code is gaining popularity.
It’s not because it’s better than free open-source libraries. It’s because it’s better marketed.
IMHO what it shows isn’t what the author tries to show, namely that there is an overwhelming swarm of bits, but rather that those bots are just not good enough even for a bot enthusiast. They are literally making money from that “all-in-one AI workspace. Chat - MCP - Gateway” and yet they want to “let me prioritize PRs raised by humans” … but why? Why do that in the first place? If bots/LLMs/agents/GenAI genuinely worked they would not care if it was made or not by humans, it would just be quality submission to share.
Also IMHO this is showing another problem that most AI enthusiasts are into : not having a proper API.
This repository is actually NOT a code repository. It’s a collaborative list. It’s not code for software. It’s basically a spreadsheet one can read and, after review, append on. They are hijacking Github because it’s popular but this is NOT a normal use case.
So… yes it’s quite interesting to know but IMHO it shows more shortcomings rather than what the title claims.
The one thing Microslop excels at is precisely lock-in.