4 ms·

But the thing is, a standardized protocol is open source, in that if you have the specs, you can implement it. Not just an API to a black box, but the whole wor

But the thing is, a standardized protocol is open source, in that if you have the specs, you can implement it. Not just an API to a black box, but the whole workings of that box. So either I misunderstood a lot about app.net, or you misunderstood what I mean when I ramble about protocols. App.net depends on central hosting, does it not? It's not like I don't wish them luck, but unless they go the wordpress.com route -- with self-hosting/tinkering being optional -- I'm just not interested in "yet another walled garden", even if it has a genuinely well meaning gardeners, no hidden costs, no price hikes. So I'll be outside, using RSS feeds, thinking about microformats, pouting :D

drharris 14y ago
^ this. It's not a protocol, just an API, one hosted centrally by a business who is making a lot of promises. I'd like to give DC the benefit of the doubt, but let's face it; since when has a startup founder planned to stick with a company until the bitter end. What is to prevent, say, Yahoo from buying them out and locking down the API? Nothing. What's to prevent them from jacking up prices once they do get traction? Can you be absolutely sure that they won't block you (as a developer) if you build a competitive service on top of their API? What happens when they get investments from a company building "AppPic", and you're trying to build a different photo sharing service on it? I completely agree with open protocols and standards, and if we're trying to change the world, this is the way to do it. OpenID and OpenAuth solve a true pain point in people's lives, and look how long it's taken to get even a moderate amount of traction. But it's finally happening to some extent (even if it is with corporate players like FB/Google). If you want to change the world, this is the way to do it. Walled gardens, corporate promises, and hype are not going to do it.

drharris 14y ago

^ this. It's not a protocol, just an API, one hosted centrally by a business who is making a lot of promises. I'd like to give DC the benefit of the doubt, but let's face it; since when has a startup founder planned to stick with a company until the bitter end. What is to prevent, say, Yahoo from buying them out and locking down the API? Nothing. What's to prevent them from jacking up prices once they do get traction? Can you be absolutely sure that they won't block you (as a developer) if you build a competitive service on top of their API? What happens when they get investments from a company building "AppPic", and you're trying to build a different photo sharing service on it? I completely agree with open protocols and standards, and if we're trying to change the world, this is the way to do it. OpenID and OpenAuth solve a true pain point in people's lives, and look how long it's taken to get even a moderate amount of traction. But it's finally happening to some extent (even if it is with corporate players like FB/Google). If you want to change the world, this is the way to do it. Walled gardens, corporate promises, and hype are not going to do it.