This isn’t a comment on whether I agree with the change. Just that your analogies aren’t applicable here.

I'd say the fact that California remains the epicenter of tech despite its high taxes suggests concentration of talent matters far more than tax rates.

bastawhiz is probably right in that Google will offer some credits and an apology, and Railway will reduce their dependence (probably), rather than a lawsuit. And I doubt Railway wants to be on the bad side of one of the few big cloud providers. But I'd be surprised if Railway didn't have a good argument to make for compensation or a lawsuit.

Not to mention, I presume the core bits of Cal.com's source code are already in place and aren't going to change significantly?

Like, this feels like a business decision and not a security decision

tbh, that companies tried to make something proprietary of this concept is probably why its adoption has been weak and why we have "MCP vs CLI/Skills/etc" debates in the first place. In contrast, CLI tools only require a general a bash shell (potentially in a sandbox environment), which is very standardised.

I don’t think it should be assumed to give network isolation, unless you’re also using extensions and something like Cilium for that purpose. I don’t think it’s the right primitive for agent sandboxes, or other kinds of agent infra.

(Obviously, you could still run a custom runtime inside k8s pods, or something like GCP’s k8s gVisor magic.)

Apple can do those things because they control the hardware device, which has physical distribution, and they lock down the ecosystem. There is no third party app store, and you can't get the Photos app to save to Google Drive.

With Claude Code, just export an env variable or use a MITM proxy + some middleware to forward requests to OpenAI instead. It's impossible to have lock in. Also, coding agent CLIs are a commodity.

Change is fraught with chaos. I don't think exuberant trends are indicators of whether we'll still care about secure and high quality software in the long term. My bet is that we will.

> Recently, with Claude's help, I rewrote everything on top of rusty_v8 directly.

worries me

If that transaction brings the customer into a negative balance, it’d be between the bank and customer to figure that out. Especially if the customer has no overdraft facility and isn’t supposed to be able to go negative, and isn’t able to easily recover the payment, or the customer is considered vulnerable, then the bank will often just swallow the loss.