The complaint is that the tech mega-corps are too big and should be broken up. Then they wouldn't distort markets (among other things) by dumping free products subsidized through ads on them, only to forget about said products two years later.
Regarding your specific interpretation:
1. The product was developed for internal use AFAIK, then released externally.
2. Google is getting something out of this: a PR boost, better engineer retention and the engineers feel good about themselves.
3. All these projects not only don't become standards, but they just add to the pile of things one has to learn because there are still too many people that are fawning over anything published by FAANG.
Re:Bazel 1.0
by cerberusss on Saturday October 19, 2019 @02:24AM
(#21297110)
I think it's unfair to sketch it as such. Isn't it clear that the parent is unhappy with the side-effects, rather than the project itself?
1. A corporation spends significant resources developing a project.
2. Then they release to allow the public to use it at zero cost. Often they even invest in supporting that external use.
3. The project provides enough value to so many users (who chose it of their own volition) that it becomes nearly a standard.
And this is somehow a bad thing?