4 ms·

I absolutely understand the frustration of the author. Unfortunately, this is what you get by making your product depend too heavily on a external product you h

by Eikon 7y ago

I absolutely understand the frustration of the author. Unfortunately, this is what you get by making your product depend too heavily on a external product you have no control on. It's a huge risk to take and may end up pretty poorly if your goals starts to missalign with the direction the product you depends on (I'm not speaking specifically for this case, I don't know enough about their product). Think about Github actions and the plethora of companies offering CI through their marketplace. The out-coming was obvious. I would argue that even if business models like that are pretty cool initially as you benefit from a company community and exposure, it starts to fall apart quickly as: - If your product is successful, the company you depend on is going to start thinking about getting their share of the pie. - Your options to diverge from what the underlying platform is allowing are very limited. When your product is an outsourced feature as a service for someone else's business, you're doomed.

tomrod 7y ago
Your second part seems like an ethical justification for taxation, incidentally. Should the producer not pay more for success because the platform they build on got them there? This being said, what was really wrong with V3? Is this simply someone's career push ("newer is better, hello promotion!") and is there a su bstantive improvement in quality or security?
- throw_m239339 7y ago
  > Your second part seems like an ethical justification for taxation, incidentally. Should the producer not pay more for success because the platform they build on got them there? By "taxation" you mean wealth redistribution from the wealthy to the state/public right? It has absolutely nothing to do with "taxation". Initially the reason why Google, Facebook, Twitter and co offered a lot of free API was just growth and user acquisition. Now that they have a significant audience, they don't need third parties to make more money anymore, so no free lunch. Ultimately these companies won't be much different from Oracle or IBM on the long run.
  - tomrod 7y ago
    Right. They offer a platform for the business to connect with consumers, operating a two-sided market. Sorry, I didn't intend for this to be a political statement, I had a conversation with a right-libertarian friend on the ethics of taxation (I see a need for it) that is still buzzing around in my mind. By taxation I don't mean wealth redistribution from the wealthy to the state (and certainly not the public, as most of us in the non-wealthy segments pay and don't observe benefit outside of defense and, when not tolled, roads), but rather charge for platform access to citizen rights. The discussion reminded me of a quote from the US President Obama a few years ago: "If you've got a business—you didn't build that"[0]. His point was that we all build these amazing marvels of technology and modernity on platforms other people provide, be it the state, other companies, and so forth. And because we build these successes on platforms, the platform needs to be funded -- be that taxes, charging, etc. The crux of Google's issue is that they change their platforms without much warning, without much similarity, and often without prior version support. Notes [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that
- ailideex 7y ago
  > This being said, what was really wrong with V3? Nothing is free to maintain.
qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago
> making your product depend too heavily on a external product you have no control on. Not only with software, with life. Everyone should consider this when evaluating anything in their life.

by Eikon 7y ago

tomrod 7y ago

Your second part seems like an ethical justification for taxation, incidentally. Should the producer not pay more for success because the platform they build on got them there? This being said, what was really wrong with V3? Is this simply someone's career push ("newer is better, hello promotion!") and is there a su bstantive improvement in quality or security?

throw_m239339 7y ago
> Your second part seems like an ethical justification for taxation, incidentally. Should the producer not pay more for success because the platform they build on got them there? By "taxation" you mean wealth redistribution from the wealthy to the state/public right? It has absolutely nothing to do with "taxation". Initially the reason why Google, Facebook, Twitter and co offered a lot of free API was just growth and user acquisition. Now that they have a significant audience, they don't need third parties to make more money anymore, so no free lunch. Ultimately these companies won't be much different from Oracle or IBM on the long run.
- tomrod 7y ago
  Right. They offer a platform for the business to connect with consumers, operating a two-sided market. Sorry, I didn't intend for this to be a political statement, I had a conversation with a right-libertarian friend on the ethics of taxation (I see a need for it) that is still buzzing around in my mind. By taxation I don't mean wealth redistribution from the wealthy to the state (and certainly not the public, as most of us in the non-wealthy segments pay and don't observe benefit outside of defense and, when not tolled, roads), but rather charge for platform access to citizen rights. The discussion reminded me of a quote from the US President Obama a few years ago: "If you've got a business—you didn't build that"[0]. His point was that we all build these amazing marvels of technology and modernity on platforms other people provide, be it the state, other companies, and so forth. And because we build these successes on platforms, the platform needs to be funded -- be that taxes, charging, etc. The crux of Google's issue is that they change their platforms without much warning, without much similarity, and often without prior version support. Notes [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that
ailideex 7y ago
> This being said, what was really wrong with V3? Nothing is free to maintain.

qrbLPHiKpiux 7y ago

> making your product depend too heavily on a external product you have no control on. Not only with software, with life. Everyone should consider this when evaluating anything in their life.