nitrammm

You must be living in a bubble if you think that's how companies operate.

Saying that someone is an asshole for using an API in a way which clearly should be possible according to the documentation is a very clear sign of that person being a junior developer who don't have actual real world experience of anything except toy projects. Any developer with some years of experience would understand that this would happen and he should not be surprised over it.

It's very possible that no one involved in this is even aware of this issue, so automatically calling them assholes is somewhat incompetent at best.

> Yes, there are lots of people on the tech scene that just don't get ideas like "don't abuse it", or "considering the consequences for other people"

Got to love the cleverness with the people who design services with the assumption that there are no such people and then goes on to hackernews and cries when a kid in China breaks their site. Lol.

Insanely incompetent.

So if someone doesn't undeestand this assumption, then they are an asshole?

That's pretty crazy viewpoint.

This would be very valid comment if toasters had manuals telling that they are perfectly safe to use while sleeping.

If you lie in your marketing material then you may put yourself in a mess. Big surprise.

To me it just screams naivety to put up a free service, advertise it as unlimited and then calling people asshole when they make too many requests.

Personally I would never rely on a service like this since it's 100% obvious it would be sudpectible to junior developers misunderstanding what is reasonable usage.

If you're putting up an API assuming all consumers will consume it in some limited and reasonable way, then you need to rethink things a bit.

This is the internet? If there are a million people around the lake fond of tea then of course you need to tell them that they can't consume all the water. Offering a free service and being upset when people use it is just naive.

It says:

> Supports unlimited requests and is free.

Typically "unlimited" is more than a million.

Explicitly telling some junior software developer in China that he can call an API for free an unlimited number of times, then afterwards calling it abuse and him and a-hole dev is definitively a bit of an a-hole thing to do in my view.

No? From the article:

> we identified a gap in GCP’s security layer that was created for SQL Server. This vulnerability enabled us to escalate our initial privilege and add our user to the DbRootRole role, a GCP admin role.

So Google took proprietary software not designed for this use-case and built their own security layer on top of it and ended up with bugs.

Of course that's an issue with the service. Presenting it as anything else than an issue in Cloud SQL seems disingenuous.

Your comment is confusing, because that's clearly not an attempt to lie.

You can look beyond "popular", create something significantly better than current tech and then convince other actors to phase out all their existing chargers in favor of it.

That describe what a computed properly is in the context of Vue.

According to what definition?

Because they weigh pros and cons. Banning these apps will have relatively few cons compared to banning WA.

Enterprise edition is only used by few people?