No they don't have incentive to cultivate developer goodwill. They are monetizing replacing developers everywhere. That is the trillion-dollar valuation. They have the opposite incentive.

▲

dcre 6 hours ago | parent [-]

They are not. A very large proportion of their revenue comes from developers. A large proportion of their marketing and product work is aimed at developers. You have to work really hard to not see this. Just look at what Altman and Brockman tweet about.

https://xcancel.com/gdb

https://xcancel.com/sama/

▲

throwaway5752 5 hours ago | parent [-]

All the various APM companies are implementing "Assign to agent" flows. The various foundation model providers will be satisfied getting a subscription for 10% of total comp of a developer, instead of pocketing 60% of the total comp completely replacing them?

The only thing that could prevent this is lack of ability to execute, like how Uber wanted to replace drivers with FSD vehicles.

▲

dcre 5 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not about what they wish would happen, it's about what they think will happen. In my view they are acting precisely like they believe they will be making a proportion of developer pay by making them more productive rather than replacing developers. I think they understand that the alternative doesn't really work out for them or anyone.

Even if they believe that their systems will eventually tank employment and replace developers rather than augment meant, the fate of Astral doesn't matter at all in that scenario because a) nobody has a job, and b) you can build your own uv replacement for $20.

	▲	dgb23 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Could it be that they want developers to use their stuff so they get telemetry and mind share out of it? As a stepping stone for the ultimate goals so to speak?