Friendly reminder: "X as a service" is just a misleading corporate euphemism for "pay forever for not owning it".
"Software as a service" actually means "pay forever for not owning the software".
"Games as a service" actually means "pay forever for not owning games".
"Infrastructure as a service" actually means "pay forever for not owning the hardware".
And so on.
There is no "cloud", it's just other people's computers
@drq I don't really want to listen one hour of rant.
So I'll repeat, that if you read EULAs when installing games, or Steam agreement, or any other service AGREEMENT (except, maybe, GOG, but the games there can have own EULAs!),
You don't own software/games either. They are just on your hardware, and if they are [dependency] independent, you may use them and copy them as long as they are there.
Not because this is allowed (sometimes it's not), but rather because it's harder to enforce.
please don't mistake whatever nonsense a company will make you "consent" to in order to use the stuff you paid for for something even remotely legal
whatever the steam agreement says I legally own everything in my steam library and I can do what I want with it, including making back-ups, selling or giving away games
the fact that valve doesn't provide a mechanism for this is another issue, but under french law (and probably many other places) digital goods *are* goods, period
@drq *and maintain the underlying OS, network connectivity, availability, scalability, and what not :)
Interesting post: https://www.kc8apf.net/2020/05/what-the-heck-is-hyperscale/
@skipsageneration which is a huge downgrade from actually owning and having actual decision-making capability over your tools.
It can be cheaper than paying for licenses and maintaining servers which is the main thing that companies look at
@drq it's not 'forever' but pay when you need it. services are a good thing. you don't see people complaining about rent but replace homes with computers and suddenly it's a big evil greedy corporations that mislead people
> you don't see people complaining about rent
You must have slept the last century and a half away.
@esde Not in all cases. In combination with stock markets and other types of invented wealth, it creates the rentier economy, sends the economic system into a death spiral. Just look at the housing market, which is a total and utter disaster.
@drq There is a cloud. It’s not all “just other people’s computers” because it’s properties are totally differently than computers that are owned (as you rather eloquently put it). If your mental model for the cloud is that it’s the same stuff you rack n stack, only racked n stacked by someone else, your mental model is wrong. It’s like leasing a car. It’s not for everyone. It’s not the same as owning. But it has its place.
@drq it's not "misleading" — the "as a service" model is openly and explicitly about users of software not owning that software. No one is hiding this or attempting to confuse anyone about it. "Not owning" is definitionally what a "service" is
This is a thing a lot of people and orgs want, just as a lot of people want to have their music library be a service rather than owning their music. No one is confused here, they just don't place a high value on ownership
@Calcifer Here's the deal. More and more software becomes exclusively "as a service". And corporations deliberately use the language reserved for goods to advertise their services.
"BUY this song on iTunes" sets the expectation that this song will stay with you forever.
"BUY this live-service DRM-protected game" sets the expectation that this song will stay with you forever.
It won't. It can be taken away from you any moment. For no refund.
"as a service" - is a deliberate propaganda term to set the narrative of "ownership being obsolete".
"No one is confused here" is a pretty disingenuous statement. Ross Scott talked about this in terms of games, there's a video link in the thread.
@drq I think you're conflating two things: DRM-encumbered purchases, which are misleading since people expect to own objects they buy; and things advertised as services, which are not
No one who ssubscribes to Creative Cloud is confused about the fact they're buying acesss not product. No reasonable person believes they've bought anything. Such thingd mostly use terms like "subscribe"
"X as a service" is openly advertising that it's not ownership of X, else "as a service" wouldn't be required
@drq For this exact reason i don't like the acronym SaaS (software as a service) and use SaaSS (service as a software substitute) in it's place every opportunity i get.
@drq this seems to imply it's unequivocally bad. And yet, most consumers seem to be okay with it. Also, the concept of ownership was always a stretch for infinitely copy-able intangible bytes.
I'm not saying the subscription model is ideal, but it has been faring better so far than the one before it.
@drq Depends. For games and music - true. In other situations, however, "pay forever for not owning software" seems like "don't use cabs because it means paying forever for a car you'll never own". Even if you pay and buy some software, in most situations you will still pay for it for as long as you want to use it, given someone might need to run and maintain that software, take care of machines, do backups and the like. That's more than just "pay to own". 😉
@drq "There is no "cloud", it's just other people's computers"
Thank you so much. I am no developer or anything remotely related (unfortunately), but I remember my confusion when this particularly aggravating buzzword took on, because I knew it from "cloud computing". Its just someone elses servers, right? Like the whole Internet ever?
I am not sure if owning is the issue. I think having control over X is the issue. So I may rephrase the sentensess that XaaS is actually paying forever for not having control over X and being controlled by X.
@drq Agree with you but we know most people don't know how to host their tools. It is a job. Fortunately we have @yunohost who are making this easier for small instance but for the rest? How do you help Coops, NGO, SME.. wanting to use great tools without the hassle of hosting/maintaining? Would love to hear about some initiatives going that way if you know some :)
@drq it pisses me off that my Photoshop CS4 will soon be incompatible with a next iOS and I’ll have to “subscribe” the next version
@drq X as a service is only fair if the recurring fees justify the maintenance and updates/upgrades the service provider is doing. I can't think of a lot of services where that is the case but they're out there
@drq "The Cloud" has been available ever since the late 1990s... Yahoo Geocities... Tripod... and then "They" decided to stop providing Free Websites as a Business and all that Content Vanished... "They" did give you six months to copy and paste all your words of wisdom to other free website services like... Microsoft Free Website... and then THEY decided to Go Out Of The Free Website Business... so now i publish on TEN Different free website/social media platforms...
@drq Yep ... just recently fighting with a friend's iCloud. It is low on space but the ability to download pictures is broken. If it were phrased any other way, one would say Apple is holding your property hostage.
This seems to be the way everything is going tho. I will prolly even mean the self driving cars to be a service instead of you owning them too
Since eventually we will be all dead ,there is no point in owning anything. Its all just a service. Without exceptions.
@drq It seems like you are implying that this is bad or wrong. What if "owning" something is more expensive for me than not owning it, with no deal-breaker drawbacks?
@alvarezp renting something is not wrong per se.
Tricking people into renting instead of buying, however, is reprehensible. A lot of "services" have no reason to be as such other than perpetually filling the providing company's pockets.
Русская нода социальной сети "Мастодонт", части Fediverse - всемирной федерации социальных сетей. Зона общения, свободная от рекламы и шпионажа, теперь и в России.