5 ms·

I wrote this 1689 days ago: "Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again?" http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for-some-of-our-apis

by franze 11y ago

I wrote this 1689 days ago: "Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again?" http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for-some-of-our-apis.html?showComment=1306481143396&m=1#c3564212561169948866 http://googlecode.blogspot.co.at/2011/05/spring-cleaning-for... Still true. HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2592399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2592399

javajosh 11y ago
It's all well and good to say "never use a Google API again because they might eliminate for any reason at any time" but there might not be an alternative. It's hard to get the data. Concentration of data is made concentration of wealth through APIs (or, slightly more indirectly, through the apps that use the APIs, perhaps internally). No-one concentrates data more thoroughly than Google (it's hard to appreciate how much data Google has; it started with scraping the web, but now they have real-time data on millions of sites through analytics, pictures of streets, WiFi ssid against lat/lon, and of course detailed video-viewing habits). The short-term consumer cycle is feeding a long-term data cycle that strongly favors consolidation. That's bad. Personally I think it's okay to "feed the beast" for a little while, but as soon as you get uptake and can afford the time you can and should stop feeding the beast.
icebraining 11y ago
Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again? Because you get a free high quality Maps API to use for a decade? What else would you have used in 2006?
- Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
  Back in 2006 a bunch of us were building OSM precisely so this wouldn't be a problem in the future. But I take your point.
adevine 11y ago
Because your options are usually: 1. Try to do it yourself or find another service, which will usually result in much higher cost and a worse implementation, or 2. Use the Google API, with the cost of lock-in. I think the best solution is to always wrap the Google API with a generic facade, so if you do have to replace the API with something down the line it is at least possible. There are some APIs out there that already do this (e.g. http://mapstraction.com/ http://mapstraction.com/ )
- kuschku 11y ago
  Well, as long as people do #2, no competitors can do #1. The best option would be for Google to get no business anymore, and for people to rely on, preferably open, competitors. Google’s business isn’t built upon providing data. Almost everything Google does is forcing people to enter data for them, or scraping other people’s data, and then using that for profit. From ReCaptcha to MapMaker, from the Knowledge Graph to their new imache captchas. (IMHO, user-generated data like training data for neural networks, OCR data, or geodata, should be illegal to use for profit under proprietary licenses, with no opt-out. If you want to use data generated by users, you should have to provide it under a copyleft license. For free. Otherwise we have another Antitrust situation, like here.)
  - Oletros 11y ago
    > For free. Otherwise we have another Antitrust situation, like here.) Which anti trust situation?
    - kuschku 11y ago
      There is a good reason why everyone here on HN considers any startup that might potentially compete with Google dead in the water – or, when Google starts a product, any companies that operated in that business previously are seen as dead. Google uses predatory pricing (financed by having all parts of their company make losses except for a select few), Google uses their market might in one business to create a monopoly in others, like every time you searched with Firefox you used to get a banner ad "upgrade now to chrome". The cases where Google was literally scraping content from competitors and displayed it without a link back – the current Antitrust trial with Yelp!, where Google scraped reviews, and displayed them in Google places comes to mind. (And when Yelp! complained, Google threatened to throw them out of the results) And yes, Google’s Maps API is another such situation. Maps is installed by default on all Android devices, giving it a huge boost for apps embedding it. Google Maps is making losses everywhere, breaking laws (see StreetView) and is still running. At this point everyone still using Maps should switch to competitors, because otherwise we’ll get a situation where Maps becomes again a monopoly. Google’s long-term strategy seems to be "get a monopoly for everything". Every monopoly is an Antitrust situation, and Maps is steering right into one.
fixermark 11y ago
What vendor's APIs would one use instead? Or does this just collapse down to "Don't use other company's APIs?"
- timonovici 11y ago
  Depends. If they are the only providers, you might want to avoid it. Take OSM - you could use the API with leaflet and their server, but if they can no longer afford the hosting costs and close the service, you could download a copy of the database yourself, and host your own copy. As a rule of thumb, try to use something standardized, with more than one implementations.
  - fixermark 11y ago
    That's a good policy (while noting the fact that setting the risk slider that conservative greatly curtails the software one is willing to create).
    - timonovici 11y ago
      Well, that might be true. But if you base your whole project around somebodies service, and they change the ToS, or shut it down, what right do you have to complain? On the other hand, if you use GMaps only on the contact page - no big harm done. It's all about trade-offs. The conservatives might want to contribute a little to a FOSS alternative, that might be of lower quality - and benefit all as a result. And cover all their bases as well.

by franze 11y ago

javajosh 11y ago

It's all well and good to say "never use a Google API again because they might eliminate for any reason at any time" but there might not be an alternative. It's hard to get the data. Concentration of data is made concentration of wealth through APIs (or, slightly more indirectly, through the apps that use the APIs, perhaps internally). No-one concentrates data more thoroughly than Google (it's hard to appreciate how much data Google has; it started with scraping the web, but now they have real-time data on millions of sites through analytics, pictures of streets, WiFi ssid against lat/lon, and of course detailed video-viewing habits). The short-term consumer cycle is feeding a long-term data cycle that strongly favors consolidation. That's bad. Personally I think it's okay to "feed the beast" for a little while, but as soon as you get uptake and can afford the time you can and should stop feeding the beast.

icebraining 11y ago

Why should anyone ever use a Google API ever again? Because you get a free high quality Maps API to use for a decade? What else would you have used in 2006?

Doctor_Fegg 11y ago
Back in 2006 a bunch of us were building OSM precisely so this wouldn't be a problem in the future. But I take your point.

adevine 11y ago

Because your options are usually: 1. Try to do it yourself or find another service, which will usually result in much higher cost and a worse implementation, or 2. Use the Google API, with the cost of lock-in. I think the best solution is to always wrap the Google API with a generic facade, so if you do have to replace the API with something down the line it is at least possible. There are some APIs out there that already do this (e.g. http://mapstraction.com/ http://mapstraction.com/ )

kuschku 11y ago
Well, as long as people do #2, no competitors can do #1. The best option would be for Google to get no business anymore, and for people to rely on, preferably open, competitors. Google’s business isn’t built upon providing data. Almost everything Google does is forcing people to enter data for them, or scraping other people’s data, and then using that for profit. From ReCaptcha to MapMaker, from the Knowledge Graph to their new imache captchas. (IMHO, user-generated data like training data for neural networks, OCR data, or geodata, should be illegal to use for profit under proprietary licenses, with no opt-out. If you want to use data generated by users, you should have to provide it under a copyleft license. For free. Otherwise we have another Antitrust situation, like here.)
- Oletros 11y ago
  > For free. Otherwise we have another Antitrust situation, like here.) Which anti trust situation?
  - kuschku 11y ago
    There is a good reason why everyone here on HN considers any startup that might potentially compete with Google dead in the water – or, when Google starts a product, any companies that operated in that business previously are seen as dead. Google uses predatory pricing (financed by having all parts of their company make losses except for a select few), Google uses their market might in one business to create a monopoly in others, like every time you searched with Firefox you used to get a banner ad "upgrade now to chrome". The cases where Google was literally scraping content from competitors and displayed it without a link back – the current Antitrust trial with Yelp!, where Google scraped reviews, and displayed them in Google places comes to mind. (And when Yelp! complained, Google threatened to throw them out of the results) And yes, Google’s Maps API is another such situation. Maps is installed by default on all Android devices, giving it a huge boost for apps embedding it. Google Maps is making losses everywhere, breaking laws (see StreetView) and is still running. At this point everyone still using Maps should switch to competitors, because otherwise we’ll get a situation where Maps becomes again a monopoly. Google’s long-term strategy seems to be "get a monopoly for everything". Every monopoly is an Antitrust situation, and Maps is steering right into one.

fixermark 11y ago

What vendor's APIs would one use instead? Or does this just collapse down to "Don't use other company's APIs?"

timonovici 11y ago
Depends. If they are the only providers, you might want to avoid it. Take OSM - you could use the API with leaflet and their server, but if they can no longer afford the hosting costs and close the service, you could download a copy of the database yourself, and host your own copy. As a rule of thumb, try to use something standardized, with more than one implementations.
- fixermark 11y ago
  That's a good policy (while noting the fact that setting the risk slider that conservative greatly curtails the software one is willing to create).
  - timonovici 11y ago
    Well, that might be true. But if you base your whole project around somebodies service, and they change the ToS, or shut it down, what right do you have to complain? On the other hand, if you use GMaps only on the contact page - no big harm done. It's all about trade-offs. The conservatives might want to contribute a little to a FOSS alternative, that might be of lower quality - and benefit all as a result. And cover all their bases as well.