> Lastly, we’ve decided to end-of-life (EOL) Twilio Programmable Video as a standalone product. Given it’s such a niche area and a relatively small part of our portfolio, we believe partnering with video industry leaders is the best way to ensure long-term product innovation for our customers. Removing Programmable Video from our portfolio will also allow Communications to more effectively focus on our pillar products - Messaging, Voice, and Email.
Right, the policy seemed fine to me until it got to this part. AI can be a way to get better at programming too. When I was learning Elixir, I watched José Valim work through the AoC puzzles[0] and followed along, typing in what José had and then working to understand it. José was doing the programming but it helped me get better at programming I think.
In that case, you're not actually competing in the competition, and that kind of thing _is_ useful. However, it'd be very much against the spirit of the competition to take those answers and use them as your own, and that's really what the policy is getting at.
Agreed, that was the sentiment I was aiming for, separating the competition aspect from the getting better at programming aspect. The policy with respect to competition seems fine. The follow-on in parens to the policy was the part I was referring to:
> (If you want to use AI to help you solve puzzles, I can't really stop you, but I feel like it's harder to get better at programming if you ask an AI to do the programming for you.)
Do you worry that there is more or less an arms race with competitors like arvie.com, and the entire industry is basically just adding service fees on top the costs of booking a site?
Not sure there is a fair approach beyond a lottery. Parks could embrace demand, and auction the sites off, but that is trading one bias for another.
I don’t think it’s much of an arms race. There are practical limitations to scan frequency that’ll keep most groups operating within the same general constraints.
Added costs/fees are somewhat inevitable. I spent $25 for two small bundles of firewood on my last camping trip. Everyone’s got to make a buck somehow.
I see Campnab as a convenience. Anyone can refresh the booking system manually, but doing so is time consuming. Some folks are happy to pay for that convenience.
Campsite availability is largely a supply and demand problem concentrated around busy centers and amplified during certain times. Drive a little further and go on the weekdays and it isn’t as much of an issue.
Perhaps lotteries would help. Some permits have been switched to this approach. I’m not sure how practical they are to implement across the board, though.
Personally, I don’t think any solution will actually solve this problem. That said, a lot of campsites do sit unused when folks fail to cancel. Reminders a week in advance of a trip could help with this. Some areas also have policies that discourage no-shows.
Using wanderinglabs has helped me get reservations at campsites when it seemed almost impossible to find availablity. Taking my kids to John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park when school gets out. Keep up the good work - great service.
This is great, I love to see these work out. This type of re-acquisition can be difficult to see through to completion. The acquiring company has moved on and doesn't want to spend resources on dealing with it. I had tried to do this too at one point but then then newish CEO of the company we were trying to buy it back from was gone and we sorta gave up.
I imagine it would have been a lot harder in my case if we'd actually integrated Readlang with Duolingo, sharing user accounts and that kind of thing. Luckily it was quite separate. I was a little stressed dealing with accountants and tax stuff here in Spain, and worrying that the technical transfer would go smoothly. But dealing with Duolingo was super easy.
