5 ms·

Sharecropper woes: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla... http://ragan

Sharecropper woes: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla... http://raganwald.posterous.com/the-freedom-to-eat-pizza http://raganwald.posterous.com/the-freedom-to-eat-pizza http://weblog.raganwald.com/2004/11/sharecropping-in-orchard.html http://weblog.raganwald.com/2004/11/sharecropping-in-orchard...

mark_l_watson 15y ago
Great links, Reg! That said, here is good opportunity to prosper on other peoples' platforms, but diversify.
- jerf 15y ago
  And when Facebook says to either remove your widget from Google+, or it will be removed from Facebook? Diversification is at their pleasure too.
  - danmaz74 15y ago
    Then you should contact the antitrust authorities: This is a blatant anti-competitive behavior if there is one...
    - jerf 15y ago
      True, but to adapt the old Wall Street saying, the courts can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.
randomdata 15y ago
Sharecropping is kind of a weird analogy to use here. In farming, sharecropping is the low risk way to grow your business. It is the landlord that takes on much of the burden if the crop fails. But with small risk comes small reward. In technology, "sharecropping" is the high risk venture. The landlord here assumes no risk at all if your application fails. The burden falls squarely on you. However, with the high risk, if you hit it big, the payoff potential is huge. So while there are some parallels, from a business point of view, working with someone else's platform is nothing at all like sharecropping.
- eavc 15y ago
  I disagree; I think the analogy is apt. You lack the resource to grow your business, so you borrow someone else's and operate at their whim. Contracts aside, the sharecropper's entire livelihood could be undermined on the whim of the landowner. Someone else has power over your ability to produce.
  - nradov 15y ago
    Not at all. Sharecroppers are typically protected by contract law; landlords can't just arbitrarily evict them in the middle of the growing season. By contrast Facebook can change their API or terms of service at any time. Facebook developers have no way to seek redress (except the court of public opinion).
    - Duff 15y ago
      Only an idiot would evict the farmer in the middle of the season. You wait until after the harvest.
    - eavc 15y ago
      As I said, "Contracts aside...".
- Duff 15y ago
  Huh? Sharecropping exists when landowners have limited access to capital, but extensive land holdings and abundant access to indigent labor. It was a technique devised to keep the tenant around until after harvest time. Poor farmers have lots of children, and the large resulting labor force gives the landlord an incentive to evict the tenant or jack up the rent immediately after harvest. It was popular in places like Scotland, Ireland and the Reconstruction South, so you can be sure the system is/was more beneficial to the land owner.
  - randomdata 15y ago
    Sharecropping is an arrangement with a land owner who rents out their land to a farmer for the payment of a percentage of the crop instead of cash. It reduces the risk for the farmer because they only have to pay based on what they are able to grow instead of a fixed amount as seen in most cash-rent arrangements. The landowner stands to lose if the crop is a failure, but can make more if the crop is a success. The term may also come with some historical meaning, but that is what sharecropping has come to mean today. Edit: Down vote me if you wish, but that is what sharecropping is in the rural community. Speaking as a farmer, sharecropping is a great way to access land in a low-risk way. I don't know why sharecropping land is seen as a negative.

mark_l_watson 15y ago

Great links, Reg! That said, here is good opportunity to prosper on other peoples' platforms, but diversify.

jerf 15y ago
And when Facebook says to either remove your widget from Google+, or it will be removed from Facebook? Diversification is at their pleasure too.
- danmaz74 15y ago
  Then you should contact the antitrust authorities: This is a blatant anti-competitive behavior if there is one...
  - jerf 15y ago
    True, but to adapt the old Wall Street saying, the courts can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

randomdata 15y ago

Sharecropping is kind of a weird analogy to use here. In farming, sharecropping is the low risk way to grow your business. It is the landlord that takes on much of the burden if the crop fails. But with small risk comes small reward. In technology, "sharecropping" is the high risk venture. The landlord here assumes no risk at all if your application fails. The burden falls squarely on you. However, with the high risk, if you hit it big, the payoff potential is huge. So while there are some parallels, from a business point of view, working with someone else's platform is nothing at all like sharecropping.

eavc 15y ago
I disagree; I think the analogy is apt. You lack the resource to grow your business, so you borrow someone else's and operate at their whim. Contracts aside, the sharecropper's entire livelihood could be undermined on the whim of the landowner. Someone else has power over your ability to produce.
- nradov 15y ago
  Not at all. Sharecroppers are typically protected by contract law; landlords can't just arbitrarily evict them in the middle of the growing season. By contrast Facebook can change their API or terms of service at any time. Facebook developers have no way to seek redress (except the court of public opinion).
  - Duff 15y ago
    Only an idiot would evict the farmer in the middle of the season. You wait until after the harvest.
  - eavc 15y ago
    As I said, "Contracts aside...".
Duff 15y ago
Huh? Sharecropping exists when landowners have limited access to capital, but extensive land holdings and abundant access to indigent labor. It was a technique devised to keep the tenant around until after harvest time. Poor farmers have lots of children, and the large resulting labor force gives the landlord an incentive to evict the tenant or jack up the rent immediately after harvest. It was popular in places like Scotland, Ireland and the Reconstruction South, so you can be sure the system is/was more beneficial to the land owner.
- randomdata 15y ago
  Sharecropping is an arrangement with a land owner who rents out their land to a farmer for the payment of a percentage of the crop instead of cash. It reduces the risk for the farmer because they only have to pay based on what they are able to grow instead of a fixed amount as seen in most cash-rent arrangements. The landowner stands to lose if the crop is a failure, but can make more if the crop is a success. The term may also come with some historical meaning, but that is what sharecropping has come to mean today. Edit: Down vote me if you wish, but that is what sharecropping is in the rural community. Speaking as a farmer, sharecropping is a great way to access land in a low-risk way. I don't know why sharecropping land is seen as a negative.