The sparklines on Downdetector's homepage can't be compared to each other. Spikes that look similar can actually have a difference of several orders of magnitude. Only meta's services have truly large spikes.
That's true and an excellent point. I commented about the reported issues elsewhere mainly because I experienced them myself (google.com and drive.google.com not loading or being extremely slow to load content). That could be entirely sympathetic though - people having issues with Meta flooding other services and briefly overwhelming them.
I find presenting this as an open source alternative to commercial solutions a little disingenuous when any commercial use of it also requires a paid license. Like many other cases it seems like the AGPL is functioning more as a trial license.
Well, I would say it depends. We have many companies using the AGPL version without buying a license. We also know that some companies have strict policies and will forbid using AGPL software unless taking a commercial license. We're happy with both users.
I like the example of Grafana with all their AGPL projects (Grafana, Loki, Tempo, ...). There are a LOT of companies using Grafana with the AGPL version.
You can double license software and have a non-AGPL license for customers. AGPL is a must nowadays to avoid Amazon and other giant companies like it to "steal" your project and start offering the same thing initially (2-3) cheaper while you are going out of business.
Ianal, but afaik one is required to release patches to the product itself only if product functionality is exposed to customers. If it is internal tool, patches I believe can stay internal. But if you want to offer, for example, hosted solution based on this product - then you are required to release modifications.
I find AGPL perfect for this use case, and my org (>100k hosts) can use it without any problem as we are using it for internal purposes, and not, say, rebranding it and offering as a part of our own product.
Thank you for this. While the visualization is useful/interesting, it frustrates me how often similar visuals are used in news stories about space junk. Yes, it's a problem, but using visuals like this without proper explanation misrepresents it terribly.
Yes, and they don't add footnotes. From visualization it looks like crash is inevitable. But yeah, otherwise there would be no visualization.
Think about it: they say 19334 objects are tracked. Imagine that many cars or trucks in the world scattered all across. Then extrude that to couple hundreds of kilometers. Would that feel congested to you? 19334 new cars are being manufactured in less than 2,5 hours...
We do love car analogies. I adore them myself. But you did forget one thing. On the surface, a typical car is averaging something like 35 mph. A low earth orbit satellite around 7.8 kilometers per second.
With orbital junk visualizations, relative size isn't that important. What matters is collision probability. Low polar sun-synchronous orbits where the remote sensing stuff typically lives are super crowded, especially at the poles; in contrast, GSO is a well kept orbit with low relative velocities, and the dead stuff drifts away, so it's really safe.
I'm sure it's not a popular opinion, but I consider AGPL to be more source-available trialware than OSS. Even for strictly internal tooling, I hesitate to use AGPL licensed code.
Overall, this looks great. My only concern the the project file being a SQLite db. I'd really like to have something to (usefully) put in version control.
I'd like to offer a free version that is useful for non-pro users. I feel that a limit on link creation is a way to differentiate. That said, I'm still experimenting with pricing so this could well change.
