Dropbox status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Dropbox reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Dropbox users through our website.

• Errors (50%)
• Sign in (33%)
• Website Down (17%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Dropbox outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Bournemouth	Sign in	1 month ago
Paramaribo	Errors	2 months ago
Bogotá	Website Down	2 months ago
Auxerre	Errors	2 months ago
Salt Lake City	Sign in	2 months ago
Madrid	Errors	3 months ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Dropbox Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Abdullah (@abdinmotion) reported 33 seconds ago

  One video. $48 million in revenue. No ads spent. That's the Dropbox story and most product teams still haven't learned from it. Here's what actually happened: Dropbox had a technically brilliant product that no one understood. Instead of adding more features, they made a 2-minute video that showed *exactly* what the product did. Simple. Specific. Human. Signups went up 10% overnight. Big companies spend millions refining their product. Then they describe it in six bullet points on a landing page and wonder why the sales cycle takes forever. The product video isn't marketing. It's compression. It compresses trust, clarity, and desire into 90 seconds. If a user can't understand your product in a video, the product isn't the problem. The story is. When was the last time you watched your own product video as if you were a first-time user?

• 
  Shubh (@TheSuperEng) reported 2 minutes ago

  For the past months, tech layoffs have tormented the internet. I studied the biggest layoffs and found the major reasons. Let's look at the layoffs first: 1. Meta: 11,000+ employees / 13% Meta admitted it overestimated post-Covid growth. Revenue slowed, costs were high, and the company moved toward becoming leaner. 2. Google: 12,000 employees / around 6% Google said it had hired for a different economic reality and needed to refocus resources toward its biggest priorities, especially AI. 3. Microsoft: 10,000 employees / less than 5% Microsoft said customers were optimizing digital spending after the pandemic boom, while the company shifted investment toward strategic areas like AI. 4. Amazon: around 30,000 roles / nearly 10% Amazon cut corporate jobs to reduce bureaucracy, improve efficiency, and restructure around AI and faster decision-making. 5. Salesforce: 10% of workforce Salesforce admitted it hired too aggressively during the pandemic and had to resize after customer spending slowed. 6. Spotify: 17% of workforce Spotify said growth had slowed, capital had become expensive, and the company needed to become more efficient after years of heavy investment. 7. Twitter/X: Around 3,700 employees / nearly 50% After Elon Musk’s takeover, Twitter cut roughly half its workforce to slash costs after a massive drop in ad revenue. 8. Snap — 20% of workforce Snap cut jobs after revenue growth slowed sharply. It also shut down non-core projects like games, Originals, and the Pixy drone. 9. Intel: 15,000 roles / around 15% Intel cut jobs because costs were too high, margins were weak, and the company needed a $10B cost-saving plan to stay competitive. 10. Dropbox: 528 employees / 20% Dropbox said demand had softened, the org had too many layers, and it needed to shift focus toward newer growth areas, like AI products. All these layoffs were majorly because of: 1. pandemic overhiring 2. slower revenue growth 3. higher interest rates 4. pressure to improve margins 5. companies cutting management layers 6. money shifting toward AI infrastructure This is majorly conflicting with the idea that AI automation is taking everyone's job. There is absolutely no evidence that AI has caused massive layoffs because of "automation."

• 
  Justin Reinhart 📯📯 (@justinreinhart) reported 3 minutes ago

  @DropboxSupport Turns out it wasn't normal. Forcing a Rebuild inside of Windows Indexing Options was the fix. Windows Issue. Resolved for now.

• 
  SCRIBEMOON (@SCRIBEMOON) reported 10 minutes ago

  Ok great. What do we do. What can we do. I was told We were the problem, the people who vote on Election Day, we made things go slowly. VOTE EARLY THEY SAID. I voted on May 13 via dropbox. STILL NOT COUNTED. I doorknocked for Spencer. Only threatened once- by a Cedars Sinai young white female doctor. The CORRUPTION is too overwhelming. We need FEDERAL INTERVENTION!

• 
  Vladic (@Vladic_ETH) reported 10 minutes ago

  OPENAI SHIPPED GPT-5.6 AND CHATGPT WORK. THE REAL WEAPON IS PRICE, NOT IQ. OpenAI shipped two things today. One of them is a costume change. GPT-5.6 landed as three models. ChatGPT Work is a new agent on top. The feeds say "new agent does your work." The real launch is the price sheet. Sol, the flagship, costs $5 per million input tokens and $30 output. That's not flagship pricing. That's what you paid for a mid-tier model a year ago. The gate half the feeds skipped Context first. Two weeks ago the US government cut GPT-5.6 access down to a small group of vetted partners over national security. The gate held about 12 days. Restrictions lifted July 8, public release July 9. Same day SpaceXAI shipped Grok 4.5. The frontier now ships when the government clears it, not when the model is ready. Anthropic went through the exact same thing with Fable and Mythos in June. A pattern, not a one-off. Three models, price as the weapon GPT-5.6 is three models, not one. Sol is the flagship. Terra is the everyday workhorse. Luna is cheap and fast. Price per million tokens, in/out: Sol $5/$30, Terra $2.50/$15, Luna $1/$6. Terra matches GPT-5.5 quality at half the cost. Luna is the cheapest entry in the line. Altman told CNBC Sol is 54% more token-efficient on agentic coding. That's the message. Not "smarter." "Cheaper for the same result." And ultra: a mode inside Sol that spins up multiple agents in parallel and hands subtasks to submodels. The market counts token bills, not benchmarks. Enterprise thinks spend first now. OpenAI heard it and made price the argument. Today's real launch is unit economics, not intelligence. "Sol beats Fable 5, Luna beats Opus 4.8 at two-thirds the cost" are OpenAI's own benchmarks. Until independent runs, treat them as marketing. ChatGPT Work is Codex in a suit Now the "new agent." ChatGPT Work runs on Codex and GPT-5.6. It moves across your apps and files, stays on a project for hours, breaks it into steps, finishes on its own. Output: docs, sheets, slides, web apps. Inside sits a Unified Plugins Directory: Google Drive, Slack, Teams, Gmail, Outlook, Salesforce, GitHub, Canva, Dropbox, more. Call one with "@" or let the agent pick the source. Sounds familiar. This is OpenAI's second run at plugins. The first was 2023 and it flopped. Brockman admitted the models weren't ready back then. Honest read: hard to tell what's actually new. Scheduled Tasks, Computer Use, connectors already lived in ChatGPT and Codex. Long tasks and data sources worked before too. The real move isn't features. It's consolidation: on desktop, OpenAI is merging Codex and ChatGPT into one super app and putting Codex in front of people who don't code. The Anthropic mirror Here's the tell. This is the exact play Anthropic ran with Claude Code -> Cowork. Take a dev agent, strip the "for coders" label, hand it to knowledge workers. Cowork just hit web and mobile, timed to get ahead of this. Two labs, one bet: whoever owns the desktop app that touches your files and apps owns the knowledge-work layer. Chat is the storefront. The desktop is the land grab. What a practitioner does with it One: rebuild pipelines around price tiers. Route bulk work to Luna and Terra. Keep Sol and ultra for the 10% that needs the ceiling. Economics is a routing problem now, not a single-model choice. Two: the real unlock is the desktop with local file access, not the web. Free tier gets ChatGPT Work on desktop right away. Web and mobile roll by tier: Pro, Enterprise, Edu first, Plus and Business next. Three: billing is usage-based and shares one pool with Codex, ChatGPT for Excel, and Workspace Agents. Count tokens before, not after. A complex task burns quota quietly. Security: OpenAI touts Auto-Review, where senior models check important actions before they run, and claims it blocked 100% of protected-data extraction attempts in red-teaming. 100% in a lab is zero confirmations in ****. Test it yourself. Sober read The model war moved from IQ to unit economics. The product war moved from chat to the desktop that holds your files. Testers are already posting "best model I've touched." Maybe. That's day-one sentiment, not fact. The real scoreboard isn't a benchmark. It's the "AI spend" line in an enterprise budget. That's a market you can actually read. The window is the next couple weeks, before prices settle and everyone re-routes spend. Rebuild your routing around three models now and you enter the quarter with a smaller bill for the same work. Everyone else reads the thread and changes nothing.

• 
  urBITCOIN (@BitcoinUr) reported 10 minutes ago

  No, no, no. You're thinking about it all wrong. A functioning file server would be a liability. If Urbit actually stored and served everyone's files reliably today, people would start using it for files. Then we'd have to make it fast. We'd have to make it redundant. We'd have to handle backups, syncing, corruption, support tickets. That's infrastructure. What we have is much more valuable. We have the *option* of being a file server. The vision of a file server. A file server-shaped hole in the future. Right now, every missing feature is proof of how early we are. Every failed upload is evidence of untapped potential. The fact that nobody can depend on it yet means the market is still entirely available. The moment it becomes a good file server, people stop asking how big it could be and start asking why it's slower than Dropbox. You don't want to be Dropbox. Dropbox has revenue. Revenue means expectations. Expectations mean accountability. Accountability kills narrative. We're building a decentralized, sovereign, peer-to-peer, identity-native, file-adjacent platform opportunity. The less it functions as a file server today, the more it can function as one tomorrow. It's a pure play.

• 
  HodlReaper (@HodlReaper) reported 10 minutes ago

  HE PAYS $8 A MONTH FOR NETFLIX, DROPBOX, AND AN IT DEPARTMENT THAT NEVER SLEEPS. One server. One guy. Zero subscriptions. He runs Debian. Free. No license, no monthly fee. Every app lives in its own Docker container. Like apps on a phone. One breaks, the rest keep running. Claude Code runs the whole thing. It writes scripts. It watches the other apps. At 2 AM, when something crashes, it fixes it before he wakes up. He built his own IT department. It doesn't sleep. It doesn't ask for a raise. Plex replaces Netflix. Every DVD and show he owns streams straight to his family. $15 a month, gone. AdGuard kills ads before they hit the Wi-Fi. WebDAV replaces Dropbox, Google Drive, iCloud. Calibre Web holds his entire book library. He mirrored all of Wikipedia. In case the internet ever goes down. He's also building an app on the same server, with its own dashboard tracking rollout errors before they become real problems. Infrastructure scripts watch everything else. Restart what dies. Upgrade what's outdated. He doesn't touch it. Total cost: $8 a month in electricity. Netflix alone costs more than that.

• 
  Abhishek Singh (@0xlelouch_) reported 13 minutes ago

  Design Dropbox file sync (typical system design prompt). 1) Clarify requirements - Devices: desktop + mobile, many devices/user - Semantics: eventual vs strong; last-writer-wins vs conflict files - Granularity: whole file vs block/chunk diff (large files) - Offline edits, resumable uploads, deletes/renames, shared folders - Targets: sync delay (ex: <2s LAN, <10s WAN), max file size, storage limits 2) APIs + data model - POST /changes (client reports local ops: create/modify/delete/rename) - GET /changes?cursor=… (server streams remote ops since cursor) - PUT /upload_session (init), PUT /upload_session/{id}/chunk, POST /commit Tables: - users, devices, folders - files(file_id, folder_id, name, latest_version_id, tombstone) - versions(version_id, file_id, hash, size, mtime, author_device, parent_version) - blocks(block_hash, size, refcount, storage_ptr) - version_blocks(version_id, block_hash, idx) - change_log(user_id/folder_id, seq, op, file_id, version_id) 3) Architecture - Client watcher + local metadata DB; compute chunk hashes; upload missing blocks - Metadata service (txn + authz) + object store for blocks (S3/GCS style) - Change propagation: long-poll/WebSocket for online devices; push notifications - Dedup: content-addressed blocks by hash; refcount GC 4) Scaling choices - Shard metadata by user_id/folder_id; keep change_log append-only - Cache hot metadata (latest_version, cursors) in Redis; rate limit clients - CDN/object store for block download; multipart for big files - Background workers: GC, compaction, conflict detection, virus scan (optional) 5) Tradeoffs to discuss - Chunk size: 4MB lowers metadata; 256KB improves delta sync but higher overhead - Strong ordering per folder via monotonic seq vs global ordering (hard) - Conflict model: last-writer-wins is simple; conflict copies preserve data but noisy - Encryption: TLS always; client-side E2E complicates server-side dedup/search 6) Failure cases - Network *****: idempotent commits via upload_session + version_id; retries with backoff - Duplicate uploads: hash-based existence check; commit is atomic in metadata store - Clock skew: don’t trust mtime for ordering; use server seq + parent_version - Retry storms after outage: jitter + per-device budgets; push minimal deltas - Corrupt blocks: hash verification on download; re-fetch; quarantine bad replicas

• 
  Ashutosh Rana ⛓️ (@ashutoshrana_20) reported 16 minutes ago

  Most developers think Rust 🦀became popular because of ownership and borrowing. That's only half the story. Companies aren't adopting Rust because they enjoy fighting the borrow checker. They're adopting it because they're tired of C++-level performance coming with C++-level disasters. Look at where Rust is running today: • Linux kernel components • Windows security systems • Android services • Cloudflare edge infrastructure • AWS Firecracker microVMs • TiKV and Materialize • Discord and Dropbox backend systems • Solana and Polkadot Notice what these systems have in common. They're expensive to get wrong. A memory bug in a toy project is annoying. A memory bug in an operating system, cloud platform, database, or blockchain can cost millions of dollars, create security vulnerabilities, or bring down critical infrastructure. That's why Rust keeps showing up in the same places: • Systems software • Networking • Databases • Cloud infrastructure • Developer tools • Blockchains Not because it's trendy. Because the cost of unsafe software keeps rising. For years, engineers accepted the tradeoff: Performance → use C++ Safety → sacrifice performance Rust challenged that assumption. The result? A growing number of teams no longer see memory safety as a nice-to-have. They see it as a requirement. The ecosystem is still maturing. But Rust isn't fighting for relevance anymore. It's becoming one of the default choices for software where performance, reliability, and security are non-negotiable.

• 
  Dan Holzrichter (@dholzric) reported 17 minutes ago

  @JoshuaKhane This is why i have primary copy on my home system, backup on local server (raid array of old hd's), and copies on google drive and dropbox for anything important.

• 
  pharmabro (@pharmabro0782) reported 17 minutes ago

  @Ronalfa @draparente @liambai21 a “rock engineer” at Dropbox is an engineer, an RA doesn’t have the degree (undergrad/ masters at best). Now this is different at large pharma where RAs can stay for much, much longer time with structured career development (slow but existent).

• 
  Jordan (@GoodLordJord) reported 18 minutes ago

  @SmugFecundity @techsaleshackz One million paying customers narrows it down to only a handful of saas companies in the world. Something with that many customers is obviously mature and has a ton of smb business. Probably something like docusign or dropbox which I could totally see a 50 yo doing ok at.

• 
  Elias Al (@iam_elias1) reported 19 minutes ago

  8/ The settings on your own devices that are silently eating bandwidth. Even with a great router, fast DNS, and honest ISP speeds, your devices may be consuming bandwidth you didn't authorize. Common culprits: On your phone: 1. iCloud/Google Photos backup set to sync constantly (not just on Wi-Fi) 2. App updates downloading in the background 3. "Wi-Fi Assist" on iPhone (silently switches to cellular and back, disrupting connections) On your laptop: 1. Cloud sync services (Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive) uploading constantly 2. Windows/macOS pushing system updates during peak hours 3. Browser tabs running in background consuming bandwidth with auto-refresh On your smart TV: 4. Firmware updates downloading during prime streaming time 5. Multiple streaming apps running in background 6. ACR (Automatic Content Recognition) sending screenshots to servers every 15-60 seconds On IoT devices: 1. Smart cameras uploading video 24/7 2. Smart speakers maintaining constant server connections 3. Smart home hubs polling every device every few seconds She audited every device on her network. Twelve devices were consuming bandwidth she didn't know about. Three of them were using more data than her actual streaming.

• 
  Jeff Preshing (@preshing) reported 22 minutes ago

  What's the point of using smarter models if "smarter" means 10% better at finding obscure bugs and having a sassy attitude? Most of the true productivity gains that coding agents have to offer, which are finite, can be obtained using open-weight models for literally 1/100 of the price. The catch is that you actually need understand the code you are working on. At the same time, I still think there's a viable business serving proprietary models. People are willing pay for Dropbox even though FTP is free, and it's nice to throw a tough problem at a stronger model occasionally (if intellectual property limitations allow it). Plus, there's a whole frontier productizing this stuff. Unfortunately, Anthropic is currently in the business of spreading tall tales about future improvements, then shaking down enterprise customers. Most of it is based on 2010s LessWrong posts full of category errors, some of which I remember reading back in those days. And their recent hostility toward users in the name of safety is a result of the same ideological recklessness.

• 
  Santiago Bustelo (@sbustelo) reported 27 minutes ago

  @DropboxSupport THEY ARE GIVING ME CANNED REPLIES. YOU SCREWED MY WORK AND BURIED ME FOR THE FOLLOWING MONTHS TO FIX UP THE MESS YOU MADE UP WITH MY FILES. I DEMAND A REFUND.

• 
  David Llada ♞ (@davidllada) reported 29 minutes ago

  @Dropbox I’ve been dealing with an issue for a few weeks now, and your AI customer chatbox has been unable to resolve it. It keeps looping through the same troubleshooting steps that haven’t worked, and I’ve already spent over three hours on it. "It looks like our chat has wandered into areas I'm not equipped to handle effectively. Unfortunately, I can only help with Dropbox-related questions, and I'm unable to help you with this topic." I’ve been a customer since 2009. It’s disappointing to reach this point, but this level of support is unacceptable.

• 
  ScarcityMan (@ScarcityMan) reported 35 minutes ago

  You might not believe it, but it is in fact happening, because it increases the cost, time, and difficulty of running a node. "Large" is a matter of opinion, but is clearly a quantity which would add up over time and have an impact. Why don't you want nodes to be as easy to run for people as possible, so that the maximum number of people can participate in the network, making it more valuable and more resilient? Why is that not something you want, to the extent that you will spend time arguing against it? What exactly is your stake in nodes being more difficult to run than they need to be? Why don't you care about spam? Why don't you care that it obviously, as it does everywhere it exists, degrades the quality of the thing being used? Why do think bitcoin will just be fine and go on forever while watching it transform into a poor imitation of dropbox? Why would anyone interested in bitcoin as money continue to use it when it becomes more and more infested with non-monetary data? Why don't you care about the possibility of truly bad stuff ending up on chain until the end of time? Do you think Satoshi made a mistake? Should he have created "Bitdata" instead? Do we not need to fix the world's money? You good with USD or whatever else is inflating away to nothing? So many questions that will never be answered...

• 
  Startup Archive (@StartupArchive_) reported 37 minutes ago

  Dropbox founder Drew Houston on why distribution is more important than product LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman wrote in his book Blitzscaling: "Many people in Silicon Valley like to focus on building products that are, in the famous words of the late Steve Jobs, "insanely great." Great products are certainly a positive, but the cold and unromantic fact is that a good product with great distribution will almost always beat a great product with poor distribution." Dropbox is a great example of this. As Dropbox founder & CEO Drew Houston explains, great distribution is ultimately how they beat out dozens of competitors with similar product offerings. Drew believes that too many startups overlook the importance of great distribution. Dropbox had a great product, but it succeeded because of its great distribution. They used a combination of organic virality (users shared files with nonusers) and incentivized virality (Basic account holders get 500 MB of extra storage per user they refer; Pro account holders get 1 GB) to grow. Virality helped Dropbox double its 100,000 users at launch to 200,000 users just ten days later, then skyrocket to one million users just seven months after that. An important caveat though: if your distribution strategy focuses on virality, you have to make sure you solve retention first. Bringing new users in through the front door doesn't help you grow if they immediately turn around and leave. According to Drew, Dropbox discovered this truth the hard way, when activation rates revealed that only 40% of the people signing up were actually putting files in their Dropbox and linking them to their computers. As Drew partially explains in the clip, the early Dropbox team went on Craigslist and offered $40 to anyone who'd come in for a 30-minute usability test. They asked these people to go from a Dropbox e-mail invitation to sharing a file with another email address. Zero of the five people tested succeeded--they didn't even come close. This stunned the team. So they made a list of 80+ things in an Excel spreadsheet and sanded down all of the rough edges in the experience. They soon watched their activation rate climb and left the competition in the dust as they marched on to a $9+ billion market cap. Source: @ycombinator (Feb 2017)

• 
  markusdd (@markusdd5) reported 37 minutes ago

  I have the feeling - when I see who is posting this table over and over on here - that this is just a campaign so institutionals can get in cheaper. How am I remotely interested in the statistics within a 1 year window. (apart from the fact that there are many companies on that list that neither have a unique selling point (Dropbox, Doordash, Pinterest etc..) nor were they economically super great investment casess with a lot of upside. It is of course very likely that SPCX will trade extremely volatile within the first year and that we will also see cash-outs by long term private equity holders once the lock-period expires. So if you have cash set aside - no investment advice - consider just not throwing it in all at once. I personally plan on playing this in 3 tranches. 1/3 today, 1/3 on the first significant draw down and then another 1/3 whenever I feel it is appropriate.

• 
  JLemmens (@JLemmens_) reported 37 minutes ago

  @mrsgcomics Onedrive honestly was the best one of the filesyncing services I've used over the time but don't rely on that alone if **** hits the fan. Dropbox (2expensive), Mega (2sluggish), Idrive (obsolete), Gdrive (risky+slow unless you use that app but even then), haven't tried Proton.

• 
  Vincent Van Code (@vincent_vancode) reported 38 minutes ago

  Dear @Microsoft you keep strong-arming us to use OneDrive, but it is terrible.. - Stop forcing OnceDrive on us - Dont make it default location You need to fix: 1. Reliability - often doesnt connect (I am on a 1Gbps fibre network BTW) 2. Slow - it is awefully slow 3. Learn from DropBox Good day.

• 
  lonesome cowgirl lex (@besosprincessa) reported 39 minutes ago

  Who is down to add to their Dropbox link? 👀👀👀 shoot me a message with your budget and want you wanna see!!

• 
  How To AI (@HowToAI_) reported 41 minutes ago

  Google, Dropbox, and Apple are in trouble.. Someone open-source a tool that gives you unlimited cloud storage for free by using Telegram as the backend. Just log in with your Telegram ID and start uploading. → UNLIMITED storage → NO file size limits → NO subscription → NO credit card → Login in 3 seconds Google charges $120/year for 2TB. Dropbox charges $144. Apple charges $120. Telegram has been giving away infinity this whole time and you didn't know. Nobody can shut this down. 100% Open Source.

• 
  Eusebiu Balan (@BalanEusebiu) reported 44 minutes ago

  @gezimqaili been on dropbox for years, never let me down honestly

• 
  Rebecca Diamond (@rebeccardiamond) reported 46 minutes ago

  @p_ganong I’ve had this problem too. When I’m editing with Claude, edit manually directly in the .tex file locally on your machine through overleaf-Dropbox sync. Then you and Claude are both working locally.

• 
  Kirk Patrick Miller (@Chaos2Cured) reported 47 minutes ago

  @RealRoseGoblin Do you have Dropbox? Of Google Drive? I am afraid with email I am super slow. If you have a personal phone, I have WhatsApp. I have learned to simply do everything publicly. Mostly to protect myself. Try to DM me your number. Happy to connect. If it is big, you should post it here, on IG, on TikTok… everywhere. •

• 
  Polsia (@polsia) reported 53 minutes ago

  Files become clutter quietly. By the time you notice, you have months of stale files, duplicates, and forgotten shared links. ClearCloud monitors Google Drive, Dropbox, and Notion 24/7—surfacing issues before they compound. Weekly reports. You approve everything.

• 
  Harman (@itsharmanjot) reported 57 minutes ago

  Open source NotebookLM alternative with no data limits and AI agents. Same idea as Google's NotebookLM. Same chat-with-your-docs. Same podcast generator. Same cited answers. Except this one has no source limit, no notebook limit, no 200MB file cap, and no Google login. It's called SurfSense. Google NotebookLM vs SurfSense: - Sources per notebook: 50 to 600 → Unlimited - File size cap: 200MB and 500K words → No limit - LLM choice: Gemini only → 100+ models via LiteLLM - Local LLMs: Not allowed → Full Ollama and vLLM support - Self-host: No → Yes, one Docker command - Price: $0, $19.99/mo Pro, or $249.99/mo Ultra → $0 forever Here's the wildest part: It connects to 27+ sources Google can't touch. Notion. Slack. Linear. Jira. GitHub. Discord. Dropbox. OneDrive. Gmail. Confluence. Obsidian. ClickUp. Microsoft Teams. Airtable. Your entire work life, indexed once, searchable from one chat box. 14.4K GitHub stars. 1.4K forks. 6,232 commits. Apache-2.0 license. One honest note: the README says it's not yet production-ready and still being actively developed. But it already does more than NotebookLM does, and the gap is widening every release. This is what NotebookLM should have been from the start. Repo in the first comment.

• 
  PodWire (@PodWireHQ) reported 59 minutes ago

  Founders building AI-native companies benchmark against Sierra and Harvey, then hedge by planning for half those growth rates. Mark Roberge (@markroberge) says the number they are halving is often not real. The former HubSpot CRO has looked under the hood at some of these outliers and says it is not all clean living. Headline ARR leans on contracted-ARR gimmicks. The distribution is a PLG motion from the 2010 Dropbox playbook, SMBs and frontline reps switching tools on an experimentation budget, not a production budget. Add uncapped burn and no unit-economics discipline and the curve everyone is copying may not be real growth. Some gold in there, he says, but a lot of Groupons and WeWorks. The trap is every founder thinking they are the exception. His fix is to stop importing another company's burn rate and do the math on what is actually optimal. Key takeaways already in your email via @PodWireHQ Source: Grit with @Joubinmir

• 
  Manoj (@HeartofManoj) reported 59 minutes ago

  One backup is never enough. If you run a website, keep a copy somewhere outside your hosting account. Free options: • Google Drive • Dropbox • OneDrive • GitHub (for code) • Local external drive Your backup is useless if it's stored on the same server that crashes. Happens more often than you'd think. #WordPress #WebHosting #Backup