Sick of scrolling through junk results, AI-generated ads and links to lookalike products? The author and activist behind the term ‘enshittification’ explains what’s gone wrong with the internet – and what we can do about it
Sick of scrolling through junk results, AI-generated ads and links to lookalike products? The author and activist behind the term ‘enshittification’ explains what’s gone wrong with the internet – and what we can do about it
I’m a big fan of Doctorow, but I have to disagree with his view of the “old, good internet”, for a reason he recognizes with Amazon but doesn’t take to its logical conclusion (at least not in this excerpt).
In step 1 of enshittification, a website is good to its users. Granted. But as the excerpt points out, Amazon was “good to its users” thanks to a massive pile of investor cash, which let them do consumer friendly (but anti-competitive) stuff like sell goods below cost, have a fair search system instead of making money off search placement fees, and not squeeze its suppliers.
But that couldn’t last. The money ran out. And Amazon transitioned to stage 2, and stage 3, squeezing its suppliers and customers, in order to pay back its investors and make a ton of money.
And this has been the life cycle for most of the internet. Google, Facebook, Twitter, pretty much every big web company started by using investor cash to give unsustainable benefits to consumers, and then either started squeezing them for profit when the cash ran out or transitioned to some other role (like becoming a propaganda outlet for the world’s richest man) because they couldn’t continue providing the customer-friendly internet we all enjoyed without going bankrupt.
What I’m getting at is, the old, good internet was inherently unsustainable, because most of the things we enjoyed about it were subsidized by investors. The Facebook that just showed you what your friends were doing? Made no money. The Twitter that the Occupy movement and Arab Spring ran on? Never made a profit. That good, effective Google search engine? Cost a lot more than ad revenue brought in. The entire modern Internet was built on the concept of locking users in with unsustainably cheap services and then squeezing them to repay investors. Enshittification was the plan from Day 1.
We can’t go back to the old, good internet. We don’t have angel investors willing to subsidize all the good stuff we enjoyed.
But we can go forward to the fediverse 😆
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?
Still no examples. You sound like republicans. “Trust me bro”
Add YouTube in there. People mad that they’re trying to make a profit when they ran deep in the red for years and years to capture the market.