New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Must remember to never get on your bad side
https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/een-tip-of-klacht-indienen-bij-de-ap
Anyone can tip them off about the suspicion of a company not following the GDPR. You don't even have to be a client yourself. No need to leave PII, they will look into it.
Its less work than leaving a complaint. That'll require some more elaborate info.
Lol, normally I wouldn't even bother but he's acting like a proper twat so what can you do?
Might do it here in Portugal?
Here is CNPD
Only can do a participation.
I would say to do it through the Dutch one for the extra LOLs as then he'll realise it's serious, but OTOH he's sufficiently clueless he'll probably consider that as resetting the clock.
@VeloxMedia
We could still settle this with a sincere apology. You have my info.
Yeah, gonna tip them off first. Drafting up a complaint as well...
Tick tock...
Then there's alway the option to sue but it's cheaper to have authorities handle it.
Already filed the complaint a month ago - I know they have some backlog (from previous complaints I made)
I've come back for my weekly Tl;dr. Please and thank you...
HI @Jord
Hallo @AlteredParadox
Thanks. I filed one before as well. About to file another one once the clock reached it's countdown.
Not sure which one is more serious... Illegal data processing, denying a SAR request or extorting people into sending PII.
Also documented where he stole my money, sent fraudulent invoices, tampered with invoices, tampered with TOS & PP, tampered with services under contract. Fraudulent use of a tradename.
Gonna leave some breadcrumbs when I can so they can make better sense of the public recordings of the scam.
Also need to file in us/uk, once having looked into least time consuming options. Probably ico, not sure about the us. Flying to the us next week so I'll ask when I'm there.
Not gonna share too much as lewrictom is still reading along, visiting a couple times a day.
Lewrictom being a wanker, nothing new.
Anyone fed this thread to AI yet to establish a good timeline of events?
I just did for you, here’s what we got:
VELOX MEDIA EXIT SCAM - COMPREHENSIVE TIMELINE & BREAKDOWN
TIMELINE - December 2025 to Present
Key Players:
PRE-EXIT SCAM SETUP (Before December 21, 2025)
Business Model:
- VeloxMedia operated as a budget VPS/hosting provider targeting LET forum users
- Offered unsustainably cheap long-term contracts:
- Annual plans
- Biennial (2-year) plans
- Triennial (3-year) plans
- 32GB RAM VPS for extremely low prices
The Trap:
- Aggressively marketed multi-year plans shortly before exit
- Customers paid upfront for years of service
- Example: Users paid $86+ for long-term contracts
- Services specifically marked/tagged as "LET" purchases in their system
Red Flags (In Hindsight):
- Black Friday 2025 deals were particularly aggressive
- Unsustainable pricing that couldn't cover infrastructure costs
- Selling long-term plans while presumably paying node/server bills monthly
- Pattern matched "summer host" exit scam playbooks
PHASE 1: THE EXIT BEGINS (December 21, 2025)
December 21, 2025 - THE CUTOFF DATE:
- Lewis executes the exit scam
- Services purchased before this date began being systematically terminated
- "Under new management" announcement posted to LowEndTalk
- Company claimed to be under new ownership/acquisition
Initial Strategy:
- Lewis disappears with all the money from prepaid contracts
- Immediate selective termination of VPS services begins
- Customers who had purchased through LET specifically targeted
- The psychological manipulation: Frame it as an "acquisition" to reduce chargeback attempts
PHASE 2: SYSTEMATIC SERVICE TERMINATIONS
Termination Pattern:
- Services specifically marked as "LET" purchases were selectively deleted
- Multi-year prepaid contracts suddenly worthless
- Customers who complained or "caused issues" prioritized for deletion
- Services running 3+ hours of downtime reported
- Some VPS remained active to create confusion
- Key tactic: Terminate gradually rather than all at once to reduce organized backlash
Customer Impact:
- Total loss of access to paid services
- Years of prepaid hosting gone
- Data potentially lost (depending on backup strategies)
- No communication or warning before terminations
- Support tickets went completely unanswered
PHASE 3: THE "NEW MANAGEMENT" DECEPTION (December 25, 2025+)
Enter "Eric" - The New Face:
- Claims to have purchased VeloxMedia from Lewis
- Positions himself as separate entity: "Velox Media Inc."
- Critical statement from Eric (Page 34): "Everything prior to 12/21/25 was Lewis's and everything new from 12/25/2025 will be mine."
The Scam Within The Scam:
- Eric claims only services purchased after December 21, 2025 would be honored
- Promises: "Please be assured that any services purchased after December 21, 2025 will continue to function as expected."
- This creates artificial distinction between "old" and "new" company
- Purpose: Prevent chargebacks by confusing the legal entity responsible
Why This Is Fraudulent:
1. No legitimate buyer would purchase a hosting company and immediately terminate all existing paying customers
2. Customer contracts are assets - terminating them destroys the value of the acquisition
3. Timing was too convenient (same day as mass terminations)
4. Pattern suggests Eric and Lewis may have coordinated the exit strategy
PHASE 4: COMMUNITY RESPONSE & INVESTIGATION
LowEndTalk Forum Reaction:
Page 34 Discussion:
- Users questioning the "big secret" and lies told as part of exit
- Recognition that the "new management" story doesn't make business sense
Page 101:
- Community documenting the selective customer deletion strategy
- Tracking which LET users still had active services vs. terminated
Page 137:
- Connection discovered to affiliate marketing
- User "affman" posted video on same day as exit announcement
- Suspicious timing suggesting possible coordination
Page 143:
- Despite the scam, some desperate customers willing to renew/pay again
- Shows the psychological manipulation was partially effective
Page 146:
- Community explicitly identifies this as "phase 2 of exit scam"
- Recognition that the "new owner" story is part of the planned exit
Page 155:
- Active tracking of remaining LET user VPS terminations
- Users reporting: "So any update from veloxmedia further terminating vps bought by LET users and marked as LET?"
- Discussion of chargeback attempts: "chargeback > AUP violation > Denial for chargeback"
- Pattern: VeloxMedia citing "AUP violations" to deny legitimate chargeback requests
Pages 158-159:
- Mixed status reports: Some VPS still running, others terminated
- Creates confusion about whether services will be honored
- Intentional chaos: Keeps victims off-balance, unsure whether to wait or chargeback
Page 162:
- Community consensus: Exit was planned from the very start
- Recognition that heavy promotion of multi-year plans was the setup
PHASE 5: ALTERNATIVE MEDIA COVERAGE (Late December 2025)
The-Online.com Coverage (December 25, 2025):
- Article published: "Velox Media UK Hosting Changed Ownership"
- Confirms Lewis sold to Eric
- Describes the exit as potential "summer host" or "exit scam"
- Key quote: "After selling unsustainable 32GB RAM VPS for cheap on lowendtalk forum, the Velox Media from UK seems to have a new owner."
- Notes Eric "has paid a huge bill to keep the company alive" but questions sustainability
- Critical observation: "Collecting money for triannual server plans but paying bills on monthly basis for the node does not feel confident from a customer's perspective."
Community Recommendations:
- Migrate to alternatives: HostBrr, Racknerd, Cloudzy
- Consider this a "dead provider walking"
PHASE 6: CHARGEBACK BATTLES & FINANCIAL WARFARE
Customer Chargeback Attempts:
- Many customers attempted PayPal/credit card chargebacks
- VeloxMedia's counter-strategy:
- Claim "AUP (Acceptable Use Policy) violations"
- Submit disputes to payment processors
- Block customer accounts
- Retain funds by claiming breach of terms
Page 138 Discussion:
- Users questioning: "Why Eric minds customer making chargeback? Since he and the new entity has no liability to fulfill the existing contract and he has no access to..."
- The smoking gun: If Eric truly bought a "new" company with no liability for old contracts, why aggressively fight chargebacks for those old contracts?
- This behavior reveals the "new management" story is likely false
Chargeback Success Rate:
- Appears to be LOW for most customers
- VeloxMedia successfully defended against many chargebacks by:
- Claiming service was provided (even if later terminated)
- Citing AUP violations
- Providing ToS that allowed terminations
- Customer burden of proof requirements
PHASE 7: THE DEADPOOL (January 2026)
January 9, 2026 - Deadpool Thread Created:
- Separate LowEndTalk thread: "VeloxMedia deadpool"
- Community tracking final shutdown timeline
- Deadpool: Betting pool on when company fully collapses
- Recognition that complete shutdown is inevitable
Current Status (as of February 2, 2026):
- Some services still running (sporadic)
- Most LET customer services terminated
- New sales presumably stopped or minimal
- Company in death spiral
- 164 pages of discussion documenting the entire saga
ANOTHER THREAD: "Hoping the service provider Veloxmedia can continue operating" (December 25, 2025)
BUSINESS ANALYSIS: WHY THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY A SCAM
Financial Impossibility:
Operational Red Flags:
Exit Strategy Indicators:
FINANCIAL IMPACT ESTIMATES
Per Customer:
- Average loss: $50-$150 per customer (estimated)
- Some customers lost $86+ (documented)
- Multiply by years prepaid (1-3 years)
Total Community Impact:
- Unknown exact number of victims
- 164 pages of discussion suggests hundreds of affected customers
- Conservative estimate: $10,000-$50,000+ in total stolen funds
- Possibly much higher depending on customer base size
LEGAL & ETHICAL ANALYSIS
Potential Crimes:
International Complications:
VICTIM PROFILES & PSYCHOLOGICAL TACTICS
Target Demographics:
- Tech-savvy developers and hobbyists
- Budget-conscious buyers (attracted to low prices)
- LowEndTalk community members (trusted environment)
- Small businesses running non-critical infrastructure
Psychological Manipulation:
1. The Sunk Cost Fallacy: Years of prepayment makes victims reluctant to chargeback
2. Hope Marketing: "New owner" story gave false hope for service restoration
3. Confusion Tactics: Keeping some services running created uncertainty
4. Blame Shifting: Claiming "old owner's mess" while fighting chargebacks
5. Time Delay: Gradual terminations prevented organized response
COMMUNITY PROTECTION MEASURES
What LowEndTalk Did Right:
- 164-page thread documenting everything
- Community sharing termination reports
- Warning other potential victims
- Sharing alternative providers
- Creating deadpool thread to track final collapse
What Could Have Prevented This:
- Escrow requirements for multi-year prepayments
- Provider verification/bonding systems
- Community blacklist of suspicious providers
- Payment processor protections for hosting services
KEY LESSONS FOR FUTURE BUYERS
Red Flags to Watch:
Protection Strategies:
UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
Are Eric and Lewis the same person or coordinated?
How much total money was stolen?
Will there be legal consequences?
Was this always the plan?
Where did Lewis go?
CURRENT STATUS SUMMARY (February 2, 2026)
This was a textbook exit scam executed over multiple phases with sophisticated psychological manipulation. The "new management" angle was particularly clever in creating legal confusion and reducing chargeback success rates. The community response via LowEndTalk's 164-page thread serves as a permanent record and warning to future potential victims.
^ Okay wow I didn’t realize how much the AI wrote there HAHA
Let's see if AI can TLDR that a bit
Thanks though
What was the prompt you used?
I'm not a big fan of ai but sometimes it's kinda ok. Had a real fight with Gemini tonight. Its great when you have noone to shout at but need to let go of some pressure.
“you’re right to be upset…” just triggers me
I passed the link to this thread into Perplexity and asked it to make the timeline, and used the labs mode.
But why would you give away your intimate thoughts to a company that will monetize them?
It seems like it's being very judgemental. For a summary, I think it would be best for it to be non-opinionated so as to allow readers to form their own opinions (even if the formed opinions will be unanimous). This is what I get with GPT 5.2:
AI prompt "Please summarize the entirety of the following thread, creating a timeline of events. State events as they occurred, and do not pass judgement or make assumptions."
Summary (thread scope + what this timeline is)
The LowEndTalk thread “Velox media under new management” runs from December 2025 (initial Discord-based announcement that the prior operator “LewiiUK / Lewis” had left) through at least February 2, 2026 (latest posts shown with “today” timestamps). It documents: (1) the management change announcement, (2) “Eric” posting via the @VeloxMedia account claiming operational control, (3) extensive discussion about who holds customer contracts and personal data, (4) disputes/chargebacks and service terminations, (5) claims about corporate identity/registration and communications, and (6) later discussion about GDPR/SAR requests and reporting to regulators.
Because the thread is hundreds of pages, the timeline below focuses on events/actions/updates (posts about a change, a policy, a communication, a termination, a document, etc.) rather than repeating every argument, joke, or opinion. All items are written as “X posted/claimed Y” without treating disputed claims as established facts.
Key parties referenced in-thread (as described by posters)
Timeline of events (chronological)
December 21, 2025 (thread creation + “new management” announcement)
December 23, 2025 (“Eric” posts: operational control, but contracts/money with Lewis)
December 24–25, 2025 (operations, “keys” rhetoric, outages mentioned, and a chargeback/termination stance)
Late December 2025 (identity/corporate details discussed; “Velox Media Inc” and contact details circulate)
January 5, 2026 (VeloxMedia explains rationale; question about missing official customer email)
January 7, 2026 (complaints about closed orders/no refunds; CPU/migration discussion; terminations tied to disputes)
January 9, 2026 (privacy-policy clause discussion; “reddit buyer speed” talk; dispute-process critique)
January 10, 2026 (admin posts a “threat letter” said to be sent to LET; discussion of tag suspension/ban)
January 22, 2026 (endgame scenarios discussed; “notification” and “monthly fee” mentioned; data-location concern)
February 1, 2026 (port 25 restriction reported; SAR (Subject Access Request) discussed; “compliance” message excerpt posted)
February 2, 2026 (after midnight “today” timestamps): dispute filed; server deactivated; regulator-report links shared
Thread status as of the latest visible posts (February 2, 2026)
Thats a great question actually, and I could write a book about that
Too much to go into... Can't for the sake of the thread... But we on the same page I assume.
Very nice ... Add v.yur.mom to the source and add their sales threads and see what it comes up with
Re AI. Still dumb as fuck and can easily be manipulated depending on the prompt.
AI prompt: "Please additionally analyze https://v.yur.mom/, which contains the chat logs between Eric and customers/community."
Timeline of events from the Discord logs (chronological)
November–early December 2025: promotions, bots, and giveaways (pre-management change)
#black-friday-2025, and a GiveawayBot entry indicates the giveaway’s end date and winner field.#account-integrationdescribing “Customer Role Verification” via a button.#announcementsexport, the user LewiiUK posts multiple Black Friday deal announcements (e.g., London/Salt Lake City/Poland flash deals with prices and promo codes).#announcementsexport, LewiiUK posts “Ho-Ho-Hosting Deals” and links to a LowEndTalk offer thread.December 21, 2025: LewiiUK announces departure / “new management”
#announcements, LewiiUK posts that he has “left VeloxMedia,” that VeloxMedia is “under new management,” and that he will ignore private support messages because he no longer has access to systems.#general-chat, users ask who the new owner is; LewiiUK replies that VeloxMedia “has been taken over by another company” and says they will look after customers.December 22–23, 2025: Eric appears and says he has “the keys,” but contracts/money were with Lewis
#general-chat, users ask for a simple announcement / who the new owners are; Eric posts “Bear with us… a lot of moving parts.”December 24, 2025: discussion about chargebacks/disputes and service continuity
#chat, multiple participants discuss whether people should dispute/chargeback and what happens to service. Eric states (in the context of the conversation) that he hasn’t cancelled users who “chargedbacked yet” and that “Service isn’t going to just go dark tomorrow,” and also describes not being able to see much beyond emails indicating a dispute/chargeback.December 26, 2025: “official update” with name/contact details; mentions “attacks”
#announcements, Eric posts an “official update,” provides an “official name and contact details” (including “Velox Media Inc” and a Pittsburgh, PA address/phone), identifies himself as “Eric Banks,” and references “yesterday’s attacks” and legal work.December 31, 2025–January 1, 2026: entity/jurisdiction discussion; “Velox Media Inc” vs “LLC”; PayPal/Stripe references; “locked down access”
#chat(Jan 1 export), participants discuss the contracting entity and incorporation/verification. Eric says “INC everything is inc,” and also states “Its Velox Media Inc,” while describing “Velox Media LLC” as something they also own and describing why they chose certain jurisdictions (as written in the chat).January 9, 2026: statements about dropping LET plans, terminating “drama” accounts, and automating chargeback detection
#chat(Jan 10 export), Eric states they are “dropping all the let plans” (while saying they plan to keep other plans), and says “Your service agreement is with lewis not us.”January 12–13, 2026: “discontinuation” emails, migrations, “monthly” conversion path for some plans
January 14, 2026: PayPal payment availability discussed; Amsterdam DC update; possible IP changes
January 15–16, 2026: California upgrades (Gold/NVMe), plan consolidation/cost rationale, runway/pricing discussion
January 20–21, 2026: portal maintenance; WHMCS rebuild for compliance; NVMe upgrades; intermittent issues
#chat(Jan 20 export), Eric says the ticketing portal is being taken down for hours for maintenance and claims WHMCS doesn’t support certain compliance standards they “require,” describing a backend rebuild to integrate with a high-availability database.January 23–27, 2026: scheduled maintenance window, network/IP issues, Poland service outage discussion
#chat, users report service issues (including Poland being down); Eric responds that a Poland host is having issues and should be fixed soon, and also discusses SolusVM support delays and troubleshooting networking/NIC/MAC/routing issues (as described in messages).What these Discord logs add (relative to the LowEndTalk thread timeline you asked for earlier)
These chat logs mostly parallel and expand the same core storyline discussed on LowEndTalk, but they add more precise timestamps and more operational detail in places, including:
(Separately: LowEndTalk users explicitly pointed others to
v.yur.momas a “discord dump” source during the megathread.)Let me get one or two facts straight here, to be entirely fair. This will probably be a 5 or 6-minute read, so feel free to jump the post if you'd like.
There was no such thing as "LET purchases selectively deleted", at least on the beginning. That behaviour started after more than 40 pages of accusations (roughly 4/5 days?) and what seemed to be some DDoS attacks, according to what was said at the time.
"Multi-year prepaid contracts suddenly worthless" is also not true on the beginning. You're compacting as immediate a course of action that took several days to occur. It then occurs, yes, but that was not an immediate consequence like AI is making it to be.
"3 hours of downtime reported" is very, very far from a valid signal of an exit scam or "total loss of access to paid service" and is much closer to DDoS routines that go on for 1-3 hours at a time, or genuine network errors that occured. It can happen to any provider, for any reason, because the standard guaranteed uptime of 99.9% allows for it (max 8h45).
There was clear inadequacy on management. It's also very, very disputable to state that gradually terminating services would reduce organized backlash, when it visibly prolonged it so much that we are on February 3rd and people are still writing things here.
It's also false that support tickets went completely unanswered. In fact, their answers from the new owner were the problem, precisely, along with his answers here.
AI being AI...
Which obviously leads one to think "and where have those 4 days gone?". AI doesn't mention it on this summary, we all know that in practice it was all Eric from 21-12.
Very, very disputable affirmation when we're talking about sales at way below the market value for similar services and hardware. These pose as potentially undesirable customers for any new owner, especially with 2/3 years paid in advance where the new owner sees 0 dollars out of it. They're closer to a liability than to a true advantage.
And yet, with decent node planning and some migrations, the alleged 25% loss could have been well overturned into a profit, even if minor, and honouring the existing contracts until term without possible renewal was perfectly possible, especially if it was a supposedly large company to buy this.
Which at this point we all know it wasn't. By far.
Or they were trying to secure a rare deal. I don't believe in "psychological manipulation" in that case, it's absurd to suppose hundreds of users can be manipulated behind a screen like that on such a hard event where they'd be more alert than ever. And in fact they weren't, as more than 160 pages clearly show.
I believe in customers pragmatically trying to secure their money and their purchased product by choosing not to go to war with the new owner, in hopes that would guarantee them their continuous stay by counteracting the condemnation trend existing at that time. Which it didn't - except for @jsg . (hehehe, sorry)
Arguably legitimate chargeback requests, since the service hadn't stopped to be provided for several users and several did attempt it just for "the feels", as it is documented on this thread (and happens every time on these type of things).
Of course, for those that had their service eliminated - and those did exist - it was at least midway legitimate, because there was a contract that unilaterally had ceased to exist without any foreseeable reason other than the place of acquisition, as stated by the new owner himself, which is a very, very questionable factor.
A company is a company. If there is a previous AUP and a TOS that allowed terminations, and people still attempt to game a system no one has asked them to game nor forced them to game, by doing chargebacks like it would solve it all, it's natural that the chargeback success rate has been low.
Many times it's out of a "following the lead" type of behaviour, or steems from some greediness on purchase and some (lesser) greediness on money recovery, because it is a lot of money for a lot of people and it's naturally understandable that merely cancelling a service that has cost them 40 or 50 USD two months ago hurts on everyone's wallet, and of course the new owner's posture didn't contribute one line to it - was awful, unprofessional and disregarding.
The community did buy their way on that result to an extent, unfortunately.
There was no deadpool in January. When there is a deadpool, this'll be a valid phase. Next.
Technically incorrect and dependent on the existing server configurations, scattering, and existing trade agreements with partners. You can point at roughly ~18 months before money starts to be an issue at the scale I've seen with VeloxMedia.
If they were VDSes? 6 months.
Normal 7$/year plans with 1GB RAM they sold before the BF? ~5/6 months. Considering a 0,30 USD/month cost per IPv4 /32 on a /24 subnet, and normal gateway fees of 0,40 USD.
AI is absolutely right on this one. It was cirurgical.
Which should definetly have been one, no doubt. All the process should have been much better managed than it was, ICO/RGPD included.
No, far from it. 40-60 USD from the several plans here seen. Only users with 2/3 plans purchased could have reached that mark... there were some, but that doesn't affect the global moving average.
The volume of sales I've seen on that thread points me to around 25/30k in lost funds, divided by the affected customers. This is not a conservative estimate, I put that as a central-ish scenario with what I know today of sales patterns and what I've seen on my own during the BF.
Eh... depends on who you're asking, apparently of what I've read, some Reddit users responsible for the r/VPS area don't like LET very much or disregard it...
When out of those 164 pages, probably 100 are just fluff, threatening, bad responses from the new owner, and some shitposting... sorry, no, it didn't. Especially because a payment processor could have been pointed at this thread to make decisions, since VeloxMedia has written with their own account as two different persons... which could have borked the new and the old agreements with the payment processors simultaneously.
There was no final collapse. It's all just an AI fantasy. As of this moment, of course. I don't know in 6 hours, for example.
Neeeeever gonna happen. Providers have infra to pay, escrow requirements are utopical to say the least, especially on such payment levels. No one forces customers to purchase the plans, customers need to assume their part of the risk and choose trustable providers that work well. Remember Repuc? Or Awmbilisim? Or Calin? Because I was here already when these busted.
There is already a verification system: moderators. And Jon Biloh. 100 USD must serve for something - or if not, just remove the extra cash for the Patron Provider tag, which is hardly significant when there is a right column where there are monthly payments to advertise of the very same amount and no provider there needs to have any vetting or handle campaigns or unsatisfied users writing defamatory topics, and just do decent vetting on a community that has seen multiple of these go bust since ages ago.
The economical sense of that one is the wrong way around - or so it seems. But I don't run this forum, so...
That should have been already done with a fixed thread long ago and I honestly don't know why that isn't yet a reality at LET.
If physical equipment frequently doesn't have payment protections nor insurance and it's much more expensive, you really think virtual equipment (which are technically "titles of specification usage") will have? No PP or insurance provider would look at this and think "hey, these guys are doing price/performance ratios way above the general market, seems trustable, seems secure, let's insure them!".
Another one to be archived under the "neeeever gonna happen" list. AI has miserably failed here on 3 out of 4.
1., 2., 3. are correct.
You just don't have a way of knowing number 4. I mean, moderators can ask for the existing server and pricing with invoice proofs, but then a bad actor can still fake them, so... this would only stop or deter unprepared/unrealistic providers. However, there are multiple payment models usable for a given cost structure - and some providers may even take net losses on some areas in order to boost sales on others or as a marketing expenditure. It will depend...
We've had several changes of ownership at LET in 2025 and one of them was from BuyVM to Cloudzy, and zero issues there. This is not a valid alert by itself.
To each their own, this is also not a valid reason, unless done collectively, like it was the case here.
If the TOS has something like "we will update this TOS and by continued usage of services you automatically agree to any changes" it is worthless to screenshot the TOS because only the most recent one, provided that it is from the same company, will count. Other suggestions seem better.
And yet, when a deadpool is born, it can be born for anyone. Old or new.
If the company is going to be used for their infra, as was alleged, it's far from a death spiral. It's just "reinventing" itself.
*continuously running, like jsg's. But yes, most were terminated.
If you've read this far: you're awesome!
I know, I know.
That entire AI-generated timeline seemed more like a hit piece targeting a non-existent deadpooled provider than an actual description of the series of events.