| ▲ | datsci_est_2015 5 hours ago | |||||||||||||
Devil’s advocate, Pareto heuristic would let us speculate that 80% of LLM traffic would be aimed directly at the largest provider, i.e. GitHub. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | abejfehr 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
I think it’s much more than 80%, it’s probably the default recommendation and folks who aren’t technical would just accept it. Probably closer to 95% or more | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | necovek an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Isn't the relative increase more of interest? If someone was only owning 10% of the market, and they've only gotten 8% (percentage points) of the 20%-not-GH LLM-related increase, they'd still be seeing a very similar spike compared to their baseline as GitHub. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | gilrain 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
Your speculation is that their competitors would naturally not see a commensurate increase in instability while “only” handling 20% of the same crisis? I don’t buy the excuse. I want to hitch my wagon to those “mysteriously lucky” competitors. (And have. And haven’t had similar issues to Github, since.) | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||