This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
This is one of the worst articles I’ve ever read. The author’s level of stupidity makes me regret the time I spent reading it.
He’s so deeply entrenched in his own ignorance that he can’t see the signs of the broken system, the concentration of wealth, the erosion of privacy, and the loss of control over our data. Of course, he also overlooks piracy.
His errors are so numerous and profound that any attempt to engage in a meaningful discussion would require him to come out of his stupor.
Not to mention the entitlement of saying "But let’s be honest, if you’re reading this you can probably pay for it," Not everybody has disposable income, you know.
I stopped reading there.
I decided to look who is the author. He is a fucking “ex-Instagram” engineer, already a shitty thing, he loves subscription while holding a company that benefits from this type of source. Again shitty. While he centralizes in him (and probably fucking some federated options), instead of focusing on the federated approach. Like usual from an imperialist and bulshitter, he does have something to sell with this post. Shitty person.
Subscriptions and enshitification walk hand-in-hand.
Purchasing updates for new versions highlights the value of new code and users weigh that with anti-features. However, subscriptions don't have to appeal to users with features or content rather leverage fear of lost function to retain users. FOMO is not a foundation for a businesses transaction and I hardly subscribe to anything.
I gladly pay more for one time purchases.
If it's not FOSS, I don't want it.
I agree, only because you can't trust buying anything anymore.
If you could trust that you were paying once for a piece of software, hardware, car, etc. these days, that'd be okay.
But the subscription hell that the world has turned into is ridiculous.
Subscriptions aren't the only sustainable model. Linux, Blender, VLC are actively maintained without requiring every user to pay a recurring fee. They rely mostly on donations, or one-time funding. And it works
A subscription may be a good model for some apps where they have high user-level server cost. But anywhere else I refuse
I think there's a distinction to be made between solutions which are client-side, versus those that are server-side, or at least have a server-side component that is functionally necessary.
For the first category, the termination of a subscription shouldn't lead to denial of access to the current build of the software: it should remain functional in the absence of lower-level updates. Ideally this software is sold as a one-time purchase, having life-time free updates bundled, or sell upgrades on a versioned basis; but a subscription fee for future updates seems perfectly reasonable too, if the previously stated conditions are met.
For the secondary category I believe it's in the service's right, to provide it's products on the basis of its own terms and conditions; that is, if it doesn't employ morally questionable practices, like: outpricing other services using venture capital, for the purposes of attracting a user-base for future exploitation (by raising fees, or by turning the user into the product; despite an ever decreasing value proposition: i.e. venture capital enshittification).
I would disagree with you. But I don’t have the time or mental capacity to discuss on the topic.
I might or might not disagree with you, but I have nothing to go on.
Halfway through the 2nd paragraph & he's wrong on almost every point being made. Stopped reading as it was making my piss itch
Eleven downvotes, great to get the hairs up 🤭
