4 ms·

Decent nocode, or some sort of nocode holy grail. I want to be able to plug APIs together, process user input, have persistence and identity, without writing s

Decent nocode, or some sort of nocode holy grail. I want to be able to plug APIs together, process user input, have persistence and identity, without writing so much boilerplate.

keenmaster 7y ago
If we don't take software engineers as a fixed population, but rather everyone on Earth with sufficient intelligence to code well with the right no-code framework (which currently doesn't exist), then this is indeed the biggest priority. Of course, I am under no illusion that no code will work for everything, such as developing ML applications from scratch. Even then, it can be a way to interface with pre-built ML apps, and use them in various industries. It would also serve as a pipeline for non-STEM workers into full-blown programming and STEM. Think about what Excel did to productivity, and multiply that by 3x or more. That's what no code could do as the 60% solution for a 200x larger labor pool (more like 80% solution for anyone who can't access engineering talent). It would also make its creators obscenely rich. With the amount of processing power that we have, the time for no code is now. By the way, there's a large chance that Big Tech incumbents won't be the ones to create the no-code holy grail. They have institutional handcuffs that will make that difficult.
- btown 7y ago
  Salesforce got it partially right. To be somewhat cynical, the trick is to enable no-code, but (a) make it just borderline user-hostile enough that you foster an entire marketplace of no-code consultancies to no-code for companies too busy and frustrated to no-code themselves, and (b) ensure everything is extensible with actual code. They got (a) balanced perfectly, but (b) is somewhat lacking, and it didn't have to be. Someone who builds the no-code-but-you-can-drop-to-code consulting network will be the next Salesforce + Oracle combined, and will empower a lot of people around the world.
  - aaronblohowiak 7y ago
    Airtable?
    - btown 7y ago
      I stan Airtable and use it daily, but without websockets or other ways to “push” changes to external systems, it’s not really suitable for (b), and from an interface perspective it’s not customizable enough (without coding a whole new UI, which runs into the above) to accommodate (a).
- leppr 7y ago
  > It would also make its creators obscenely rich. How? If you want a language to be adopted and become standard, it would have to be free and open-source. You don't get "obscenely" rich from that. This is a good example of those problems that could relatively easily be solved with a proper public-goods funding mechanism, but very difficultly without.
  - keenmaster 7y ago
    The developer can create an ecosystem of services that leverage network externalities and tie into the no-code framework. Of course, they’d have competitors. However, there are network externalities both with the no-code framework itself and some of the services that tie into it. If you launch an open-source no-code framework simultaneously with your own ecosystem of services, then you will profit from those services as the first-mover. Remember, non-engineers are more sensitive to ease of use. They aren’t as fickle as engineers are with dev tools. That’s why they pay money for Microsoft Word and stick with it even though there are many free competitors. They’re accustomed to Microsoft Word, their friends use Microsoft Word, and the software is always marginally better because outsized profits are reinvested into the software. Additionally, if the above is not enough to make one obscenely wealthy, consider this: it is not pre-ordained that no-code would be as open as a programming language like Python. In fact, it might be better for the users if no-code is a platform rather than an open-source framework (I don’t believe that, but maybe). Obviously, platforms can charge rents as the intermediary between end-users and suppliers of services on the platform. That will make you fabulously wealthy, assuming widespread adoption. So, if there is a lack of: - profit potential from ancillary services, and - funding from users, suppliers, and patrons - or, in any case, if the no-code would be fundamentally worse with open source then a for-profit platform is the way to go. Personally, I believe that the open source + ancillary services route will result in a better ecosystem. Nonetheless, it’s worth investigating which of those three clauses are true (if any) and why, because that will have big implications for the no-code project.
AndrewKemendo 7y ago
This seems like an antigoal to me. Abstracting away infrastructure just means it will become increasingly centralized as a commodity and less likely/harder to create independent services.
- ronyfadel 7y ago
  I don’t necessarily agree. Look at n2n or userbase, they’re open source and can be self hosted. Other nocode tools can follow suit, and can be federated. I agree with the other comment that this can have the same effect as the one Excel had during the past decades (there are companies running completely on Excel). At the moment though, the tools feel too limited.
  - AndrewKemendo 7y ago
    Sure they can be, but the whole ethos behind it is "don't make me think about anything other than the application." So by default the majority are looking for hosted services, otherwise they'd just build their own stack. For anything other than some organization building a bunch of applications, that same Nocode Dev has no need to ever migrate so long as some major service provider is doing it for them.
tomc1985 7y ago
Ah, the impossible holy grail of businessmen and marketeers everywhere
- ronyfadel 7y ago
  I’m a developer by trade and I want nocode, albeit thinking as a product guy/entrepreneur. I want to get to market fast, and then possibly iterate with code.

Decent nocode, or some sort of nocode holy grail. I want to be able to plug APIs together, process user input, have persistence and identity, without writing so much boilerplate.

keenmaster 7y ago

If we don't take software engineers as a fixed population, but rather everyone on Earth with sufficient intelligence to code well with the right no-code framework (which currently doesn't exist), then this is indeed the biggest priority. Of course, I am under no illusion that no code will work for everything, such as developing ML applications from scratch. Even then, it can be a way to interface with pre-built ML apps, and use them in various industries. It would also serve as a pipeline for non-STEM workers into full-blown programming and STEM. Think about what Excel did to productivity, and multiply that by 3x or more. That's what no code could do as the 60% solution for a 200x larger labor pool (more like 80% solution for anyone who can't access engineering talent). It would also make its creators obscenely rich. With the amount of processing power that we have, the time for no code is now. By the way, there's a large chance that Big Tech incumbents won't be the ones to create the no-code holy grail. They have institutional handcuffs that will make that difficult.

btown 7y ago
Salesforce got it partially right. To be somewhat cynical, the trick is to enable no-code, but (a) make it just borderline user-hostile enough that you foster an entire marketplace of no-code consultancies to no-code for companies too busy and frustrated to no-code themselves, and (b) ensure everything is extensible with actual code. They got (a) balanced perfectly, but (b) is somewhat lacking, and it didn't have to be. Someone who builds the no-code-but-you-can-drop-to-code consulting network will be the next Salesforce + Oracle combined, and will empower a lot of people around the world.
- aaronblohowiak 7y ago
  Airtable?
  - btown 7y ago
    I stan Airtable and use it daily, but without websockets or other ways to “push” changes to external systems, it’s not really suitable for (b), and from an interface perspective it’s not customizable enough (without coding a whole new UI, which runs into the above) to accommodate (a).
leppr 7y ago
> It would also make its creators obscenely rich. How? If you want a language to be adopted and become standard, it would have to be free and open-source. You don't get "obscenely" rich from that. This is a good example of those problems that could relatively easily be solved with a proper public-goods funding mechanism, but very difficultly without.
- keenmaster 7y ago
  The developer can create an ecosystem of services that leverage network externalities and tie into the no-code framework. Of course, they’d have competitors. However, there are network externalities both with the no-code framework itself and some of the services that tie into it. If you launch an open-source no-code framework simultaneously with your own ecosystem of services, then you will profit from those services as the first-mover. Remember, non-engineers are more sensitive to ease of use. They aren’t as fickle as engineers are with dev tools. That’s why they pay money for Microsoft Word and stick with it even though there are many free competitors. They’re accustomed to Microsoft Word, their friends use Microsoft Word, and the software is always marginally better because outsized profits are reinvested into the software. Additionally, if the above is not enough to make one obscenely wealthy, consider this: it is not pre-ordained that no-code would be as open as a programming language like Python. In fact, it might be better for the users if no-code is a platform rather than an open-source framework (I don’t believe that, but maybe). Obviously, platforms can charge rents as the intermediary between end-users and suppliers of services on the platform. That will make you fabulously wealthy, assuming widespread adoption. So, if there is a lack of: - profit potential from ancillary services, and - funding from users, suppliers, and patrons - or, in any case, if the no-code would be fundamentally worse with open source then a for-profit platform is the way to go. Personally, I believe that the open source + ancillary services route will result in a better ecosystem. Nonetheless, it’s worth investigating which of those three clauses are true (if any) and why, because that will have big implications for the no-code project.

AndrewKemendo 7y ago

This seems like an antigoal to me. Abstracting away infrastructure just means it will become increasingly centralized as a commodity and less likely/harder to create independent services.

ronyfadel 7y ago
I don’t necessarily agree. Look at n2n or userbase, they’re open source and can be self hosted. Other nocode tools can follow suit, and can be federated. I agree with the other comment that this can have the same effect as the one Excel had during the past decades (there are companies running completely on Excel). At the moment though, the tools feel too limited.
- AndrewKemendo 7y ago
  Sure they can be, but the whole ethos behind it is "don't make me think about anything other than the application." So by default the majority are looking for hosted services, otherwise they'd just build their own stack. For anything other than some organization building a bunch of applications, that same Nocode Dev has no need to ever migrate so long as some major service provider is doing it for them.

tomc1985 7y ago

Ah, the impossible holy grail of businessmen and marketeers everywhere

ronyfadel 7y ago
I’m a developer by trade and I want nocode, albeit thinking as a product guy/entrepreneur. I want to get to market fast, and then possibly iterate with code.