I think the timelines are too short for trends to be completely apparent yet. You can typically hire people faster than you can scale your income sources, even in the face of tremendous demand. Right this moment there's factors pushing folks to fire, but I also do see some companies delivering more (not a lot, but noticably more) and seeing increasing sales as a result. Those are in conflict, and we'll see which way the trends push through time.
The author of that post effectively re-defines "memory"/"RAM" as "data", and uses that to say "accessing data in the limit scales to N x sqrt(N) as N increases". Which, like, yeah? Duh, I can't fit 200PB of data into the physical RAM of my computer and the more data I have to access the slower it'll be to access any part of it without working harder at other abstraction layers to bring the time taken down. That's true. It's also unrelated to what people are talking about when they say "memory access is O(1)". When people say "memory access is O(1)" they are talking about cases where their data fits in memory (RAM).
Their experimental results would in fact be a flat line IF they could disable all the CPU caches, even though performance would be slow.
Someone built an archive of Github statuses to show aggregate uptime, last month and this month Github's uptime is below 90%, not even one "nine" of availability: https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/
87% uptime for Github in February 2026. They've got to get it together.
They do have a billing check, but that check is looking at "eventually consistent" billing data which could have arbitrary delays or be checked out-of-order compared to how it occurred IRL. This is a strategy that's typically fine when the margin of over-billing is small, maybe 1% or less. I take it from your description that the actual over-billing is more like dozens of dollars, potentially more than single-digit percentages on top of the subscription price. Here's hoping they tighten up metering <> billing.
Then the right thing to do from a consumer standpoint is to factor that overbilling into their upfront pricing, rather than surprising people with bills that they were led not to expect.
If you change the zoning, people will build to take advantage of that more flexible zoning. I own land in the city, I'd absolutely pursue the financing and coordinate the redevelopment of that land if:
- I could make more money
- if the zoning allowed it.
As it is right now, it'd be profitable, but the zoning isn't there for it.
