[GabrielBianconi]

Our investors aren't looking for safe, they're looking for a small chance in funding the next Databricks or similar. Most times it doesn't work out unfortunately, but that's part of the game.

(Also, we raised the capital in 2024 and didn't burn most of it.)

[jdw64]

First of all, I respect your decision. I apologize for speaking too hastily about your choices. What I was trying to do was simply talk about how incredibly fast AI infrastructure changes. I also understand your respect for investors looking for the next Databricks. But the reason I wrote what I did is because the confidence expressed in the README ended so early. That said, such confidence isn't necessarily a bad thing. Isn't it said that victory belongs to challengers like you, not cynical people like me? I feel bad about that part. Still, I have no intention of withdrawing my skeptical view about whether AI infrastructure can succeed as an open source startup. I'm very sorry it came across as if I was mocking your failure. That was not my intent. I was simply trying to leave a comment saying that AI infrastructure has a different direction from traditional infrastructure.

[GabrielBianconi]

Thanks, appreciate the follow-up. It's certainly still to be determined if OSS AI infra will pan out, but I hope it does!

[jdw64]

I wish you success. I wasn't trying to mock your failure, and I'm truly sorry if I made you feel bad. I don't want to be a cynical person who mocks others' challenges. I apologize again for that. I was just expressing that something doesn't seem right from my current perspective. I hope your next challenge goes well.

I mean it. I'm sorry once again