this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2025
208 points (98.6% liked)
Enshittification
3628 readers
14 users here now
What is enshittification?
The phenomenon of online platforms gradually degrading the quality of their services, often by promoting advertisements and sponsored content, in order to increase profits. (Cory Doctorow, 2022, extracted from Wikitionary) source
The lifecycle of Big Internet
We discuss how predatory big tech platforms live and die by luring people in and then decaying for profit.
Embrace, extend and extinguish
We also discuss how naturally open technologies like the Fediverse can be susceptible to corporate takeovers, rugpulls and subsequent enshittification.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The whole point of Docotorow’s work on enshittification is that it wasn’t inevitable. Tech CEOs have always been pulling the profit lever as hard as they could, but there’s a reason why those levers begun moving when they weren’t before, due to a confluence of bad policies. If we decided to, we could enforce antitrust law, repeal DMCA 1201, mandate interoperability, ban surveillance advertising, and unionize tech companies. And if we did that, guess what? Those disciplinary forces would help keep the psychopaths who run tech companies afraid of their users, competitors, workers, and regulators. Make enshittifiers afraid again, and we can have a good new internet.
I get it, and I disagree.
See, I think the investors and funders behind Big Internet were not just pulling the profit lever - they were pulling political levers to achieve regulatory capture, to get that favorable regulatory environment they needed to make a ton of profit and regulate their competitors out of existence.
And they kept pumping funding into Big Internet while it was unprofitable because they believed eventually they'd win the political battle and have a free hand to extort profits. Which was a fair assumption given, you know, the history of regulation in general.
If the United States suddenly comes to its senses, passes good legislation, and starts enforcing its own regulations, and if we assume, in this utopia, Big Internet won't be able to buy enough American politicians to counter that, I think one of two things will happen.
One, Big Internet moves overseas to more favorable regulatory environments, provides American consumers with a substandard product, and tells them it's their own government's fault in order to encourage us to change the laws in their favor.
Or, two, Big Internet has to operate at a loss again, can't attract new funding on the promise of later profits, and goes bankrupt.
Because I don't think Big Internet can afford to give its users the same experience it did ten or fifteen years ago. In order to give us the ad-free YouTube, unrigged Google search results, algorithms that show us what we want instead of what the Republican Party wants, websites without tracking cookies, and all the other things we enjoyed, it had to run at a loss.
The old, good internet was subsidized by investors who expected profits in the future. No expectation of profit? No subsidized internet services. At least not provided by the big centralized for-profit companies that have controlled the United States' Internet experience for the last twenty years or so.
You seem to be assuming that the only two possibilities for a tech company’s bottom line are either a) grotesque monopoly profits or b) operating at a loss. But this is a false dilemma, since there’s a huge range of somewhat less profitable but still highly profitable business models in between those options! Doing a few billion less in stock buybacks every year while investing in better quality products or higher wages isn’t going to affect whether the tech giants are profitable. They just might have to compete a little more for those margins.
Name a company that is following your proposed methodology.
Your bizarre “challenge” misunderstands the argument Doctorow is making. The idea isn’t to produce a magical new kind of corporation that will behave ethically out of the goodness of their hearts, but to change the material conditions companies operate under, such that their self interest aligns with what we want, due to their fear of losing business, being outcompeted, being fined, having workers go on strike, etc.
I understand it perfectly which is why o asked for an example. You all have no examples or ways to enact your fantasies. Shocker. Your solition here amounts to "remove greed from humanity". Fantasize more why dont ya. It is you amd the other guy who dont understand humanity or reality for that matter. Its all so ecident with the downvotes and complete lack of intellectual integrity.
Literally the opposite. Have you considered a career as a scarecrow salesperson?