[WolfOliver]

That is a very good observation. see a comment below:

> One interesting open question now is: It is easy to say how the backend provider would bill the company for its services. It is harder for the app provider (the SPA) to bill their services.

[WolfOliver]

Maybe this aligns with the current direction we are moving with AI. The frontend app itself becomes more and more worthless and in the future every frontend is custom made. linkedrecords makes this very possible especially if you combine it with some form of upper ontologies where apps can collaborate on the same data.

Maybe it is not as big of a problem as pirating the app would be against the companies SLA and serious businesses who pay the most money would just not do it.

But yes, it is a open point.

[nullbio]

It's a very interesting idea. You've given me food for thought. Maybe the payment model becomes purchasing access to the frontend, instead. But then you're back to square one with traditional infrastructure to accomplish the gating. It could be lighter weight though.

I'm curious about the encryption side as well. Still reading through your docs.

I'm also a little skeptical on the claim of it making things simpler. It kind of feels like it just moves the responsibility. Instead of developing infrastructure/backend and communication with it, you instead have to accomplish most of that on the frontend instead? Maybe it does simplify things in the end but my intuition is telling me that you'll end up with an equal amount of different types of complexity.

[WolfOliver]

There is not encryption for data at rest. It might be something I look into.

[WolfOliver]

... You could also sell a desktop app instead of a SaaS app. And then the desktop app connects to linkedrecords server. This model a few advantages: - You can do the purchasing in the app (.e.g traditional license keys) - The user is not affected if your business closes. He still has the desktop app running locally and can use any linkedrecords server.

[saaspirant]

So it is "just" backing up the encrypted db dump to a remote server? Still works and is perfect