Combat abuse. I don't think this is a solvable problem, so obviously this won't be a silver bullet. But maybe will it impose more cost on the abusers creating a nicer app store experience for everyone. Or maybe this only imposes cost on the honest ones? I don't know how much validation they do.
> 2. re-build every app with pointless newer api version literally every year or it gets taken down.
Fix vulns. This also gets rid of abandoned apps. It also probably provides an "opportunity" for the dev to agree to new T&C.
> 3. Push an update or a new app or they kill your account.
This one seems shakier to me, but it might feed into an effort to get rid of abandoned apps. But I disagree with this being healthy for the ecosystem, if that's actually the reason.
I'm not trying to defend google, but from working in FAANG, some of this is obvious. None of these things save a significant amount of server or storage costs. Some of it is clearly anti-abuse and efforts to defend themselves from the constant stream of crap that tries to make its way into the app store.
> everything else they do
Google isn't like some dude (sundar) making decisions. It's a bunch of millionaires and billionaires making decisions. There's some high level guidance, but the difference between different divisions is 100% based on who's running that particular show.
What's wrong with "abandoned" apps? I still use an app called DiskUsage. Not sure you can still get it on the store or it comes with scary warnings now. Continues to work great. Never found a replacement. Don't want a replacement. This one works.
When an app works but keeps getting updated, that means the enshittification is starting. How else do you extract money out of a completed app?
This is a strawman argument, but I think well meaning.
Generally, when people talk about wanting a human in the loop, it’s not with the expectation that humans have achieved perfection.
I would make the argument that most people _are_ experts at their specific job or at least have a more nuanced understanding of what correct looks like.
Having a human in the loop is important because LLMs can make absolutely egregious mistakes, and cannot be “held responsible“. Of course humans can also make egregious mistakes, but we can be held responsible, and improve for next time.
The reason we don’t fire developers for accidentally taking down prod is precisely because they can learn, and not make that specific mistake again. LLMs do not have that capability.
If it got to the point where the only job I could get paid for is to watch over an LLM and get fired when I let its mistake through, I'd very quickly go the way of Diogenes. I'll find a jar big enough.
Not all people affected by an EO have an equal opportunity to generate that paperwork. Going to court or getting involved in the legal system have costs, of both time and money. Not something all people have enough of to spare.
Ahh, I mistakenly thought some form of public defenders were appointed in deportation cases. The free lawyers I’ve seen must have been from non-profits.
Combat abuse. I don't think this is a solvable problem, so obviously this won't be a silver bullet. But maybe will it impose more cost on the abusers creating a nicer app store experience for everyone. Or maybe this only imposes cost on the honest ones? I don't know how much validation they do.
> 2. re-build every app with pointless newer api version literally every year or it gets taken down.
Fix vulns. This also gets rid of abandoned apps. It also probably provides an "opportunity" for the dev to agree to new T&C.
> 3. Push an update or a new app or they kill your account.
This one seems shakier to me, but it might feed into an effort to get rid of abandoned apps. But I disagree with this being healthy for the ecosystem, if that's actually the reason.
I'm not trying to defend google, but from working in FAANG, some of this is obvious. None of these things save a significant amount of server or storage costs. Some of it is clearly anti-abuse and efforts to defend themselves from the constant stream of crap that tries to make its way into the app store.
> everything else they do
Google isn't like some dude (sundar) making decisions. It's a bunch of millionaires and billionaires making decisions. There's some high level guidance, but the difference between different divisions is 100% based on who's running that particular show.
reply