the open AI careers page must be hit like crazy right now

I bet you anything this is related to wage growth or lack thereof ... I mean why would you party if you have no disposable income ?!

I want to do the opposite I want to run jvm languages on wasm

There are a few efforts in this direction, TeaVM but also Graal, I think you just need to stay tuned

also https://github.com/mirkosertic/Bytecoder and https://github.com/i-net-software/JWebAssembly as well as the already mentioned (in some other comment) https://cheerpj.com/

most of them are still experimental, while CheerpJ offers Enterprise support (but it targets the browser).

oh, and let's not forget j2cl https://github.com/google/j2cl

Founding Engineer Equity is broken but hear me out what if we broke it even more ... come on

that's a nice wasm use case

That's a good one!

does this mean there's a path from clojure to wasm ?! and the wasm component model ?

Yes! Since jank is using LLVM, AOT compiled jank programs have a path to WASM. This isn't a primary goal for jank, but it's one we can definitely pursue once jank's Clojure parity and general dev UX has been established.

that would be amazing!

The very idea is a bit silly, why would you help an llm understand a website!? Isn't that proof that the llm is less than capable and you should either use or develop a better model? Like the whole premise makes no sense to me

Being cynical it looks like a way of holding features hostage for the purpose of extracting revenue.

I sympathise with the problem of re-sellers abusing their hard work but they are also creating two different classes of product with this change.

Sonarqube/cloud is working the same way.

Community edition with enough features for small businesses.

Once you reach a certain size, you'll need the other features but you now have the money to pay for it and as you've used the community edition for some time, you know that you want this products. (and if the product is deep into your workflow, the cost of change is high that you'll rather pay than switch)

As I'm currently building the stack for my startup, I'm more interested in that model than into a "full features 7 days trial" that then turns into a 19$/m/user.

They got backlash from their community for switching licenses. They got forked and now want to appease to the forkers/fork users by offering a slightly better license... Seems like the the 101 for Startups atm.

When did they recently try to change licenses? I must have missed that. I don't see any PRs or issues related to a license change, aside from their change from MIT to AGPL 4 years ago.

How is this offering "a slightly better license"?

It's not but they present it as such, excuse my brevity.

A business operating in a jurisdiction is a privilege. If you don’t like the rules, leave.