18 ms·

The problem is that the tasks we ask of our software are harder - we now expect them to talk to other computers, not all of which really want to be talked to by

The problem is that the tasks we ask of our software are harder - we now expect them to talk to other computers, not all of which really want to be talked to by random people writing one-off bits of software.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
> not all of which really want to be talked to by random people writing one-off bits of software. That's a bigger problem than it sounds. There are two main reasons software doesn't want to talk to each other. One, preventing vandalism and general abuse. Two, rent seeking. The software is wrapped around something you need, and it'll only allow access on its own terms, and after an appropriate fee. I dream of an Internet where this isn't the case. In particular, I dream of an Internet where I don't have to choose between either writing scrappers, or entering separate relationships with companies for every little bit of information I want to fetch via an API. Those relationships are a problem and a liability, even if they don't incur any actual monetary costs. Beyond just being annoying noise that you have to keep track of, relationships make software non-shareable; they force you to centralize. If I make my "home-cooked" app that needs to know the weather, currency rates and be able to derive geographic coordinates from addresses, that's three separate APIs, three separate relationships. I'm not going to ask any of my users (whether five or five million) to get their own API keys, get their own relationships with the API providers. I'm forced to put a server in front of the app, introducing a single point of failure, shackling the app - and more importantly, I'm forced to force the users to enter a relationship with me. Their copy of the app is now dependent on my server not going down, and me managing my relationships with API providers. Cooking recipes people share never force you to use a particular ingredients supplier. They don't even care where you get the ingredients - whether you grow them, buy them, or receive them as gifts. I wish software was more like this.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

> not all of which really want to be talked to by random people writing one-off bits of software. That's a bigger problem than it sounds. There are two main reasons software doesn't want to talk to each other. One, preventing vandalism and general abuse. Two, rent seeking. The software is wrapped around something you need, and it'll only allow access on its own terms, and after an appropriate fee. I dream of an Internet where this isn't the case. In particular, I dream of an Internet where I don't have to choose between either writing scrappers, or entering separate relationships with companies for every little bit of information I want to fetch via an API. Those relationships are a problem and a liability, even if they don't incur any actual monetary costs. Beyond just being annoying noise that you have to keep track of, relationships make software non-shareable; they force you to centralize. If I make my "home-cooked" app that needs to know the weather, currency rates and be able to derive geographic coordinates from addresses, that's three separate APIs, three separate relationships. I'm not going to ask any of my users (whether five or five million) to get their own API keys, get their own relationships with the API providers. I'm forced to put a server in front of the app, introducing a single point of failure, shackling the app - and more importantly, I'm forced to force the users to enter a relationship with me. Their copy of the app is now dependent on my server not going down, and me managing my relationships with API providers. Cooking recipes people share never force you to use a particular ingredients supplier. They don't even care where you get the ingredients - whether you grow them, buy them, or receive them as gifts. I wish software was more like this.