I'm biased because I work at Google on an open source project, but the complaint here seems to be:

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?

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.

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?

This is actually called the "throw over the fence" open source development model.

Most Google projects are like this, including Android which is the main reason why vendors struggle with os updates.

AFAICT Android is a pain to upgrade because of custom closed-source drivers and lack of ABI stability in Linux, so you need to recompile a driver for a newer kernel.

Android is not a Google's internal product, unlike Bazel.

Last week we had a major security vulnerability in Android just because Google can't user the same Linux kernel that everyone else are using.

There exist LTS kernel versions for a reason, you know.

This. Treble is suppose be their ABI

Right. Like the v8 javascript engine. If you want to build it, you need to download gigabytes of sources and install Googles internal build system tools first...

yes, and often lots of prebuilt build tools no one really knows how to build from source. It's a real mess open source.

They even maintain internal tools that are similar versions, but better. Google uses Borg internally, but they open sourced the cheap knock-off known as Kubernetes instead.