Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Why is it assumed that it is "unfair" for a company providing a free service to hoard the data you give to them?

It's unfair because LinkedIn had built a precedent of openness and made no indication that this was a temporary or limited offer (at least not a straightforward "hey this might shut off someday..." notice).

Also from purely a market perspective, this is unethical as it's about providing a business platform to others and then closing it once your in-house solutions begin to compete with those you've opened the platform to.

> If you don't like LinkedIn, don't use it.

Problem is, LinkedIn is not just a tool, it's also a network. You can change it as you would a tool, but you'll leave behind the network. Now, get enough supporters to change with you, well then you may have done it! Similarly, the node.js/io.js tussle was/is about getting a better tool but required getting the network to come with (and this was probably what woke up Joyent).

> Trying to convince people who don't care to stop using LinkedIn is pointless.

You may not care but it certainly is a stretch to claim that others don't care (though at face-value, your statement is actually a truism). I would argue that the majority would/will care as long as a strong enough effort is made to show them why. (Also, this link has 200+ points and 100+ comments...)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: