Maybe tailscale thinks it can dodge enshittification by means of having the worst, most self-parodic name of all time ("tailscale"), which will lull VCs into a stupor? (I can remember it's a VPN and not a CDN only because the name is so bad it's memorable.)
Raising more money for what appears to be a working, useful product certainly doesn't inspire confidence, after all.
There is software which evaded that fate for decades. So maybe, instead of coming up with vague self-help style life hacks, we should look into this kind of software and derive from there what makes it robust against being taken away from its users.
It universally (but not exclusively)
1. is under a copyleft license
2. has no copyright assignment or CLA
3. has a large enough and diverse enough set contributors to make relicensing practically impossible
This is not bullet proof but it makes ensh@#$%! and vendor lock in very hard. Of course not every software that does not fulfill each of these criteria will end badly but the points the article puts forward will not really make a difference.
A good additional indicator is if the project is governed by a 501(c)(3) organization or the equivalent in other countries. A 501(c)(6) will not do.
Open-source is a defense. There are other defenses that essentially rely on there always being competition.
However, these introduce another failure mode, abandonment and/or stagnation due to lack of resources. Ultimately, when money is running out, enshittification OR abandonment is inevitable, unless there's another viable way to get more money.
Not very convincing IMO. The strategies laid out seem general and vague. The only thing I can gather is that they don't expect to reach market saturation for a while so enshittification is not an immediate threat which makes sense to me. Also quoting Google in that section is a bit ironic.
Good luck to them anyway. As a free tier user I hope they let me use their services. It has been immensely helpful to me.
5 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 41.7 ms ] threadRaising more money for what appears to be a working, useful product certainly doesn't inspire confidence, after all.
"Defenses against ensh@#$%!".
There is software which evaded that fate for decades. So maybe, instead of coming up with vague self-help style life hacks, we should look into this kind of software and derive from there what makes it robust against being taken away from its users.
It universally (but not exclusively)
1. is under a copyleft license
2. has no copyright assignment or CLA
3. has a large enough and diverse enough set contributors to make relicensing practically impossible
This is not bullet proof but it makes ensh@#$%! and vendor lock in very hard. Of course not every software that does not fulfill each of these criteria will end badly but the points the article puts forward will not really make a difference.
A good additional indicator is if the project is governed by a 501(c)(3) organization or the equivalent in other countries. A 501(c)(6) will not do.
However, these introduce another failure mode, abandonment and/or stagnation due to lack of resources. Ultimately, when money is running out, enshittification OR abandonment is inevitable, unless there's another viable way to get more money.
Good luck to them anyway. As a free tier user I hope they let me use their services. It has been immensely helpful to me.