3 ms·
That's a pretty defeatist take. Surely if you pay for a service you should expect the provider to be making good faith efforts to provide the same quality of se
by airstrike 3y ago
That's a pretty defeatist take. Surely if you pay for a service you should expect the provider to be making good faith efforts to provide the same quality of service over time? Natural degradation would be fine, but purposefully sandbagging the service so it gets worse because cheaper is unacceptable.
That we have become numb to the point that we collectively accept such poor behavior on the part of vendors in concrete cases does not make the behavior acceptable in general.
- alexdunmow 3y agoName a single subscription service that never changes over time? If your product is based on another company's service then you are beholden to them.
- majkinetor 3y agoElectricity, water, TV etc... they basically always work. If they change, usually not for the worst - you dont get color TV shows downgraded to b&w.
- josephcsible 3y agoWell, TV service does get downgraded a lot by channels being removed out from under you.
- doliveira 3y agoThe common thread is these are utilities, not VC-backed start-ups wanting to dominate the world.
- shmatt 3y agoThe millions it takes to train OpenAI models is given by people who would like to get it back + some profits. Once the VCs start forcing the roadmap onto the employees, thats when customers get screwed over. So to be more precise, building a product on top of an unprofitable product means things will usually change for the worse (cost cutting) sooner or later
- _ea1k 3y agoThat's the thing, I'm sure there are others who'd report that it has gotten better. Even improvement inevitably makes some things "worse".
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mitchdoogle 3y agoThis is why contracts exist