benmdi

Fun quick read. Scary part to me is that this seems like something that could actually happen pretty easily.

> You can't be tied to the dollar without backing your coin with dollars.

Not exactly. There are projects like Maker and sUSD which create synthetic dollar equivalents via collateralization with native crypto assets. (Caveat here, Maker did recently add USDC, an IOU backed stablecoin, as collateral as an emergency measure. Unclear if that change will be permanent or not).

Based on recent events, I'm sure this will be well received...

Well said. Exactly right.

Some general backend and web work, and some blockchain stuff as well.

The latter is the opposite set of tradeoffs. Completely permissionless, but lots of riff-raff and scammy nonsense going on.

Yeah, I agree. I hope the legal system forces Apple to allow opt-in third party app stores. Would go a long way towards alleviating these kinds of situations.

Those situations are in no way comparable. It's wild to me you think they are.

No one is saying they are responsible for promoting your app. What we're saying is that if they're going to lock down their platform so that you can't install apps without going through their store, then they shouldn't arbitrarily, with no explanation, destroy years of good will thats been built up by genuinely building and delivering a high quality app people love.

I think you're suffering from the "just world bias", honestly. Look it up if you haven't heard of it. TL;DR is that as much as you want to believe they don't, shitty, unfair things happen everyday. Pretending they don't doesn't help the situation.

This is just another way of saying "Apple doesn't give a f*ck about indie developers." Might be true, but it's still shitty.

That's a BS answer, and if it's the one Apple wants to give, then they should not be surprised when they 1) are seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build a business on 2) Get treated like a monopolist in courts.

Generally I agree, though this App does have a broad enough market that it could probably be sold as sustainably as a one-time upgrade for years without exhausting the potential, especially if it's a one man project.

Interesting thoughts. Not sure what the developer could have done differently, here? The App is published on Apple's Platform, and it's impossible for him to distribute outside the store. He has been working on it for years, been a good citizen of the App Store, and created something people seem to genuinely love and value.

Honestly, this is one of the reasons I hope the legal system does eventually require Apple to enable opt-in, third party app stores. We need to have SOME release valve from being at the mercy of Apple's whims.

>It seems likely Apple has downrated the phrase "weight loss" altogether.

What makes you say that?

Wow. I literally use this App every single day. I think it was $5 and I have gotten enormous value from it for 3+ years.

Sad that what is probably a random glitch on Apple's part can just kill a person's livelihood overnight.

I used to be a full time iOS contractor but have moved away from it in the last couple of years. Dealing with this kind of junk is one of the main reasons why. I have lots of similarly frustrating stories from my clients.

Thanks for your thoughts- yes you seem to have grokked the point of my article. It's as much an exhortation for the Bitcoin community to build the vision of the world it wants, not to blindly assume it will arrive!

Haha, no I was in this universe, and am old enough to have participated in that era as well ;)

I think it's pretty clear, though, that both the quantity and quality of open source software has increased drastically in the last decade or so. I think it's fair to say I may have stretched the degree of causation git had, as opposed to just correlation. But I also think it's pretty evident git, as a tool, had something to do with it.