Choosing Pealk as the example in this very short rant is a classic Straw man argument. What about Padmapper?
PadMapper, a company that was working to directly compete with Craigslist? What about Padmapper?
Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
31–40 of 176 posts
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Craiglist has a "monopoly on data", they have a monopoly on their data and they have not incentive to make their data freely available.
What Craigslist has is what economists call "positive network externalities" or network effects. Which just means that it's a really valuable service because tons of other people use it . Buyers go there because lots of people are selling, and lots of people selling go there because they know lots of buyers visit the site.
This is the perennial frustration with the immense power of the network effect, a power that all start-ups live and die on.
Unfortunately, us humans have a hard time banding together and forming enough consensus to 'jump ship' enmass to a new service. Especially, when the a lack of 'innovative features' on a given service barely registers on the pain scale.
Look at the internets SOPA protest, the entire integrity of the internet was threatened and we did something about it. But how can you generate enough support around: we need better mash-ups to view craigslist postings!
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#33Hell yeah they owe us. Their services would not exist without our user data (netflix excluded). Internet is still relatively young, but I think eventually we're going to have to have laws that regulate how companies that collect user details allow access to 3rd parties. Monopolies are illegal for a reason. Companies who build infrastructure have to manage it fairly.
> Hell yeah they owe us. And for that data, they provide you with services. That doesn't mean they should be required to hand that data out to any service that requests it? I mean, are you really asking that companies like LinkedIn allow free access to it's api's and user data to any 3rd party that requests it? > Monopolies are illegal for a reason. Well, no. Monopolies just require additional oversight. Microsoft, f…
"That doesn't mean they should be required to hand that data out to any service that requests it?"
It does, however, mean that it's up for negotiation, if the consumers want it to be.
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#34I think the reason people here feel this way is because the general consensus among HN users is that the best product wins and that's all that matters. If a company has a monopoly on data and refuses to provide an API they're saying that they don't want to compete on the quality of their product (craigslist for example) they want to keep their position without the benefits to the users. Padmapper made craigslist apar…
Actually, Craigslist values us, the users, more than most companies. You know how? By leaving so much money on the table that you can't help but love them! Craigslist is a breath of fresh air in a world where everything is optimized as much as possible to part us from our money!
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#35Hell yeah they owe us. Their services would not exist without our user data (netflix excluded). Internet is still relatively young, but I think eventually we're going to have to have laws that regulate how companies that collect user details allow access to 3rd parties. Monopolies are illegal for a reason. Companies who build infrastructure have to manage it fairly.
If there were laws regulating how data is provided, I think that as a company, I'd simply stop providing data entirely. It definitely wouldn't be free. APIs are nice, but legal hassles aren't worth dealing with.
If you're a company, you'll do what makes you money, regardless of how you feel about regulations that affect you.
Legal hassles are totally worth dealing with if the cost of managing them doesn't exceed your profit. If you're the right company, legal red tape can be a very effective barrier to entry.
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#36People have a right to complain if they don't agree with a given company's decision. The fact that the company has a legal right to do something, or the (alleged) fact that they are basing their decision on "the bottom line", does not make that decision the right one. And if indeed it is the businesses's prerogative to do this or that, certainly consumers have at least the right to voice their disapproval. I really w…
You point is valid about the "but they have a right to do X". I think it does provide good discussion however. My point wasn't so much that they have the right to do that, but more about when your playing with another company's API don't expect to disrupt them. Choose a start-up that is already successfully and profitably using a company's API and make your service even better. AKA don't compete with the mothership.
I know I am in the minority, but I happen to think that the central concern of any business ought to be to maximize end-user value. Profits are a means to that end, not the other way around. So I would evaluate the API issue from the perspective of whether it adds value for the user or not, not whether in some myopic accountant's opinion it adds to the "bottom line."
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#37It is frustrating that due to network effects, for-profit companies, gain a near monopoly on important data types. YouTube owns video, Craigslist owns classifieds, Netflix owns video viewing, etc. It would be great if there was regulation over certain types of data that would require companies to post back to a central database if they take certain kinds of information. It would be great if there was a device that co…
> It would be great if there was regulation over certain types of data that would require companies to post back to a central database if they take certain kinds of information. It would be great if there was a device that could help level the playing field.
My god, I hope not. The last thing we need is legislation that determines, because I went through the work of building up and creating a successful product and now have a massive amount of valuable data, I have to share it in the interest of 'leveling the playing field'.
I've been on the side of being a content creator with a very successful site, that was promptly scraped by a competitor because I had ammassed a large amount of very useful data. This data that was, through my site, freely available to the public, and the ad revenue helped pay the bills.
So I really don't have a lot of sympathy for someone who had, as part of their business model, the practice of scraping content from someone else's site, nor do I agree that we, as developers, should have free and unrestricted access to someone else's API... they are the ones gathering/storing the data, building the network, etc.. and any use they decide to allow us is at their discretion and a gift. Nothing wrong with that.
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#38Interesting perspective that I'm inclined to agree with. It seems that large companies with vast amounts of data or users are generally expected to give developers a way to interact, but the reality is that they have the ability and right to control access to said resources however they feel benefits their business best (or even reduces the amount of shit they need to monitor). I've always agreed with Calacanis that…
Rand would say that both parties in a transaction have the right to negotiate the terms of said transaction.
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Craigslist's one goal in the world is to make a profit. That's it. Everything else comes secondary. If they decide that providing users a service will help them accomplish this, then have them provide a good service (which they do). However, they don't owe anything to any businesses or even any users. If users don't like this, let them go to an alternative. Welcome to capitalism, where the users decide what product t…
Craigslist is a privately-owned company and was actually a non-profit at one point. In the past Craig Newmark has talked about Craigslist as a tool for community organization and so on. If Craigslist were 100% profit-driven I think it could have made a lot more money off of its huge user base.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you see how the appearance of not being profit driven can increase your profits?
Re: Craigslist, LinkedIn, Netflix, and others don't owe us anything.
#40People have a right to complain if they don't agree with a given company's decision. The fact that the company has a legal right to do something, or the (alleged) fact that they are basing their decision on "the bottom line", does not make that decision the right one. And if indeed it is the businesses's prerogative to do this or that, certainly consumers have at least the right to voice their disapproval. I really w…
You point is valid about the "but they have a right to do X". I think it does provide good discussion however. My point wasn't so much that they have the right to do that, but more about when your playing with another company's API don't expect to disrupt them. Choose a start-up that is already successfully and profitably using a company's API and make your service even better. AKA don't compete with the mothership.
You included Craigslist to get pageviews.
Your own linked articles about that topic are a user only complaining about the legal takedown of a useful tool [1] and another complaint about UX with an included blurb asking startups and users to put their time and data into something better [2]. Nothing about API changes or right to a company's proprietary data.
[1] http://blog.garrytan.com/save-padmapper-craigslist-is-wrong-... [2] http://pandodaily.com/2012/05/30/craigslist-is-squashing-inn...