Your comment makes no sense. Invent is a pretty meaningless word in this case. Invent doesn't mean 'make a product capable in working in the real world where it has to follow laws, physical limitations, and deal with stupid people'.

If you invent an app in a few hours, then get fined out of existence your app sucks.

If you invent an app in a few hours, then it crashes under high load, your app sucks.

If you invent an app in a few hours and your code sucks and you can't adapt it later, your app sucks.

> If you invent an app in a few hours, then it crashes under high load, your app sucks.

Yes

> If you invent an app in a few hours, then get fined out of existence your app sucks.

No

>> If you invent an app in a few hours, then get fined out of existence your app sucks.

>No

Sorry, but back here in reality apps must comply to regulations. It's your job as a voter to make sure your regulations comply with reality.

For one, not everyone cares about the rules. For two, rules rarely apply to all people all the time. For three, this is external to the apps and you can hardly judge the app for what arbitrary regulations their location has at that time.

Caring or not caring about the rules is irrelevant if those rules make it impossible for you to operate.

Uber has famously skirted rules and has gotten away with it largely because they've been able to throw VC money at PR, lobbying, and paying fines. Unless you happen to be similarly lucky funding-wise, your first round or two of fines for breaking rules can easily shut you down permanently.

Maybe it's a bit hyperbolic to say that this would mean "your app sucks", but the end result is that you built something that no one can use and you can't make money of of. That sucks.

Apps that stop working because the company folds definitely suck.