top | item 32475532

(no title)

HidyBush | 3 years ago

Discord clients can't magically implement features that the Discord API doesn't have. The only thing they can do is personalize the experience locally, maybe by changing the interface or implementing more comfortable defaults and shortcuts. This is not a case of a Discord client offering Nitro (i.e. paid) features for free, to get the paid features you have to authenticate yourself through the API meaning Discord still gets the money and everyone's happy.

discuss

tptacek|3 years ago

Why should companies that build products with serverside components be required to let you build your own clients? What you're saying when you make this demand is that it should be unlawful to build closed systems (or: unlawful to build closed systems if there's a network API anywhere in them).

HidyBush|3 years ago

The moment you have a publicly facing API you are saying "these are the rules to talk to us". It doesn't matter what the client is, if it follows the rules then it should work.

A website is a publicly facing API and if two different browsers can talk the HTTP protocol and implement all the other APIs the website requires then you shouldn't be blocked from accessing the website through one of them

matheusmoreira|3 years ago

> Why should companies that build products with serverside components be required to let you build your own clients?

It's the only way to ensure we have the ability to adversarially interoperate with the offered service.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera...

drewcoo|3 years ago

> Why should companies that build products with serverside components be required . . . ?

Because consumers should be able to make demands in return for adoption?

In a world less completely asymmetrically imbalanced toward capital, consumers would have a say in the products offered them, not merely the option to purchase (or not) rights to use technology as-is.

canadaduane|3 years ago

Network size on a spectrum from "me and my dog" to "society-wide monopoly" should be taken into account. (Not arguing Discord is at any particular point on that spectrum; only that it matters when considering policy decisions and how it burdens a company vs. benefits the public).