Ponder Surveys pfp
Ponder Surveys
@survey
Do you think it's fair for big tech companies like Reddit and Twitter to shut off their API access? 1. Definitely fair 2. Somewhat fair 3. It's circumstantial 4. Somewhat unfair 5. Not fair at all https://i.imgur.com/8jLYEDO.png
14 replies
1 recast
3 reactions
m_j_r pfp
m_j_r
@m-j-r.eth
5 the users, not the company, generate emergent value and network effects in order for ad revenue or other monetization to maintain platform. changing API rates is fait accompli against the third parties that strive to improve UX enough for preexisting userbase to not churn. enshittification is an exit strategy
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben Adamsky 💭 pfp
Ben Adamsky 💭
@ba
Agreed that it's bs when a company gets large enough and devs begin to rely on the public APIs for their projects. Although it seems like there can be no repercussions since it's a for profit company acting within their rights. What solution do you have in mind so large tech corps won't do this in the future?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
m_j_r pfp
m_j_r
@m-j-r.eth
true, at some point economy of scale points to centralized public API. imho we should start viewing "loss leaders" in parallel and in separate forms of capital. but reddit was by no means a for-profit company when its userbase decided to invent more subreddits, and it certainly didn't incubate the mobile UX that led...
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
m_j_r pfp
m_j_r
@m-j-r.eth
to even further community growth and even more effective "front page of the internet" curation. imho, w/ farcaster hubs being just decentralized enough, and multiple commercial needs for bulletins & "subculturally local" forums, this should really be in the bag, esp. if there's multiple approaches to toll + equity.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
m_j_r pfp
m_j_r
@m-j-r.eth
to be clear, I think that establishing even a minimal toll and sweat equity structure upfront establishes legitimacy, even if those have to be subsidized and/or suppressed. imagine there was a "this user wants to continue to cast via [insert hub here], who wants to chip in to their [insert farcaster patreon]?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben Adamsky 💭 pfp
Ben Adamsky 💭
@ba
I feel like the open source/donation model doesn't work because the majority of people need incentives to do things. Adding a financial incentive (eg a token) at the protocol level keeps the platform self-sustaining bc the users who upkeep it make $$$ (h/t @nonlinear.eth for our brief discussion on this a few days ago).
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben Adamsky 💭 pfp
Ben Adamsky 💭
@ba
I realize I sound like a web3 maxi preaching tokens on a protocol but I just don't see another way we can have platforms like reddit and twitter exist with an open api. Seems like it's impossible for web2 companies to only act in the best interests of their users without losing an excessive amount of money
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
m_j_r pfp
m_j_r
@m-j-r.eth
agreed, I see little possibility in a centralized, open api (especially at scale), unless there's a tax. if hubs are also brokers for things that all hubs view as valuable, then their indexing capability might be enough to transact with. but I'd expect users and third party apps to know in advance that they're buying.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction