*Never build your house on someone else's land". Episode 237.
Are the people on the piratebay "pissed at ICANN" when they lose a domain? No, they learned that the domain name is worthless by itself.
The problem in your example is that the people behind TPB work with the principle that any domain name might be taken away from them at any moment, unlike Mr. @music, who was naive enough to think he was immune to any takeover just because he called dibs on the name.
ThePirateBay didn't build their solution on the premise that they would have an irrevocable right to their domain name. If the land owner decided to take back the land (like they did, many times) TPB could simply take their things and move elsewhere (like they did, many times).
I don't think I ever saw someone from TPB saying "oh, they took our domain, it's so unfair!", instead what I hear them saying is "we are building magnet-links and a bunch of redundant proxies so that our service continues to exist even if we lose all the domains we have.
In case of twitter handle or other free services there is no consideration on user's side so there is no binding contract, therefore the service could be revoked at any time.
but if you have a self-hosted bitcoin account or ether account or use some of the naming services on those platforms, this isn't the case
You can own land that no one wants, you can own anything that no one wants.
too few people care about true sovereignty to change the behavior of popular services
Also, if it helps, by that logic no one shouldn't be using iOS or anything by Apple, which is also a rule that I follow.
In the early days if something had gone wrong, it might have been a different story.
Though I suspect that companies with good VC connections might have side channels into Apple or Google to clear up problems.
Not like little guys who can wake up one morning to discover their $20K/month business is no more.
Not at all: one could see a future where any of those companies become Uber rivals - they're both researching autonomous vehicles. When that comes, one incident at Uber and its reason enough to expel them.
You can build on someone’s land, but you’d be wise to be ready to move as soon as it becomes necessary. Essentially you are a nomad, reconfiguring your business to changing conditions, accepting that things will change over time.
Splitting yourself between platforms is exactly how you risk mitigate this kind of thing.
This is a relatively recent development. I'm fairly convinced it didn't happen sooner in an anticompetitive move to promote native apps over the open web. (Same with web push notifications and a million other tiny things.)
Instagram did not and could not have had a webapp in those days (which is a majority of the time Instagram has existed).
Ironically, given your conspiracy theory, it was Meta that broke Instagram for the web.
a good excuse to never build anything
life is risk
this sucks, no doubt but this snark is so unproductive
Unless you’re Apple or Google, you’ll have some single points of failure. But that’s not the same as the livelihood of what you’re setting out to do being reliant on a single vendor for over a decade.
... on closed platforms. Open and censorship-resistant protocols do not have have this risk, Free Software does not have this risk.
So, yes, if in 2023 you are still building things on closed platforms despite all the cautionary tales, you deserve all the snark you'll get.