cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/5431344

The enshittification of the internet follows a predictable trajectory: first, platforms are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. It doesn’t have to be this way. Enshittification occurs when companies gobble each other up in an orgy of mergers and acquisitions, reducing the internet to “five giant websites filled with screenshots of text from the other four” (credit to Tom Eastman!), which lets them endlessly tweak their back-ends to continue to shift value from users and business-customers to themselves. The government gets in on the act by banning tweaking by users - reverse-engineering, scraping, bots and other user-side self-help measures - leaving users helpless before the march of enshittification. We don’t have to accept this! Disenshittifying the internet will require antitrust, limits on corporate tweaking - through privacy laws and other protections - and aggressive self-help measures from alternative app stores to ad blockers and beyond!

  • @rickdg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    552 years ago

    The internet will always have many niche places, but overall it can’t escape late stage capitalism.

    • @ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      132 years ago

      Big tech has really ruined what we all thought the internet would be

      I remember when the Internet first came out in the '90s, you would occasionally read someone talking about how when radio and TV first started they were pretty cool and wide-open as well, but they gradually got taken over by large corporate interests and played/showed a lot of trash filled with advertisements.

    • @clutchmatic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      The ideal internet was open and free if you could pay hosting and bandwidth costs - generally those who were associated with universities could

  • shastaxc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    262 years ago

    If you wanna fix this, there needs to be more incentive for people to develop open source software. It doesn’t have to be created by individuals either. Organizations and nonprofits can be used to make basic services for the Internet, like utilities. Or this could be a government agency. There is already talks of classifying Internet access as a utility instead of leaving it to private ISPs. This would be a step beyond that but could be done first.

    • @Amends1782@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      Monetary donations help a ton. Even a few bucks. I always pay for FOSS projects I enjoy and use.

  • @lloram239@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    222 years ago

    Antitrust and privacy regulations are all nice and good, but I think the core problems of the Internet is a technical one: We don’t have peer to peer connectivity on the Internet anymore.

    The whole reason for the Internet to exists in the first place was to connect computers, but for whatever reason, that feature of the net never made it down to the average user. Dynamic IP addresses means you can’t find anybody and firewalls/NAT means you can’t connect to them even if you do. Even trivial tasks like copying a file from one computer to another have no standard solution on the Internet. This means everybody is forced to services like GoogleDrive or Dropbox as an intermediate. Same is true for chat, video calls and so on. Everything has to go through another service to be usable. The majority of those services don’t even use standard protocols, lock the user in, which in turn empowers them to use enshittification.

    Until peer to peer connectivity is solved I have little hope for the Internet to get better.

    • @vic_rattlehead@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      If someone wants to host something, NAT won’t stop them. IMO the bigger problem is that most folks have neither time, skill, nor interest to make p2p a reality. I’m a pretty savvy admin, host a lot of services for myself and family, but I don’t pretend to be good enough or vigilant enough to run anything public, i.e. mail server, lemmy server, etc, without major security concerns.

  • @centof@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    202 years ago

    Anybody got a TLDW;? Or did all of you just comment on the title and the snippet?

    • @centof@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      322 years ago

      Reposting from PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com in Technology@beehaw.org

      Here’s an AI outline because this was actually a good talk:

      How Platforms Die
          The speaker introduces the concept of platform decay or “enshittification” and how it leads to the death of internet platforms.
              He defines platforms as firms like Uber, Amazon, and Facebook that connect users and business customers.
          He outlines a 3-stage process called enshittification where platforms:
              Are initially good to users
              Abuse users to benefit business customers
              Eventually abuse business customers to only benefit shareholders
          This results in the platform becoming a “pile of shit” that dies.
      
      Facebook Case Study
          He uses Facebook as a case study of enshittification’s 3 stages:
              Initially attracted users by promising privacy protections and custom feeds
              Then broke promises and sold user data to advertisers and flooded feeds with publisher content
              Finally, reduced value to users and fees for publishers to extract all value for shareholders
                  This led to an angry user base and brittle equilibrium
      
      Causes of Enshittification
          Lack of Competition
              Weak antitrust enforcement has allowed consolidation across industries
              Companies can use predatory pricing to undercut competitors
              Mergers eliminate competition
                  Example: Google relying on acquisitions rather than in-house innovation
          Unrestricted “Backend Tweaking”
              Tech platforms control the algorithms and systems behind their products
              They can arbitrarily change these to alter user experiences
                  e.g. Facebook reducing visibility of publisher content in feeds
              Done without transparency, oversight or accountability
          Bans on Reverse Engineering
              Laws like DMCA 1201 and CFAA criminalize circumventing DRM and terms of service
              Makes it illegal to reverse engineer platforms to enable interoperability
              Tech companies use IP laws to prevent modding and adversarial interoperability
                  e.g. Apple using IP laws to prevent iOS modding
      
      Solutions
          Strengthen Antitrust Enforcement
              Block anti-competitive mergers
              Break up existing tech giants
          Pass Privacy, Labor and Consumer Protection Laws
              Comprehensive federal privacy laws with private right of action
              End worker misclassification through gig economy
              Apply consumer protection standards to platforms
          Allow Adversarial Interoperability
              Roll back laws criminalizing modding, reverse engineering
              Use government procurement to incentivize open ecosystems
              Appoint special masters to oversee platform legal threats
          Keep Interoperators in Check
              Bind interoperators to the same privacy, fair trading and labor laws
              Determined through democratic process vs corporate policy
      
      Conclusion
          We need to prepare and spread these policy ideas to capitalize on the next crisis
          Efforts are underway to enable a better internet through this approach
      
      • @madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 years ago

        The steps to fix this might as well say have Jesus come to life and fix it all… It’s depressing, but there is zero chance of any of that happening… Nevermind all of it.

        Our best bet is for consumers to fight back with their wallets, but people are on average too stupid to even understand how they are being fleeced. We’re fucked.

      • @Pretzilla@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        02 years ago

        Thanks. Here’s a slightly easier to read on mobile non-monospace paste:

        How Platforms Die The speaker introduces the concept of platform decay or “enshittification” and how it leads to the death of internet platforms. He defines platforms as firms like Uber, Amazon, and Facebook that connect users and business customers. He outlines a 3-stage process called enshittification where platforms: Are initially good to users Abuse users to benefit business customers Eventually abuse business customers to only benefit shareholders This results in the platform becoming a “pile of shit” that dies.

        Facebook Case Study
            He uses Facebook as a case study of enshittification’s 3 stages:
                Initially attracted users by promising privacy protections and custom feeds
                Then broke promises and sold user data to advertisers and flooded feeds with publisher content
                Finally, reduced value to users and fees for publishers to extract all value for shareholders
                    This led to an angry user base and brittle equilibrium
        
        Causes of Enshittification
            Lack of Competition
                Weak antitrust enforcement has allowed consolidation across industries
                Companies can use predatory pricing to undercut competitors
                Mergers eliminate competition
                    Example: Google relying on acquisitions rather than in-house innovation
            Unrestricted “Backend Tweaking”
                Tech platforms control the algorithms and systems behind their products
                They can arbitrarily change these to alter user experiences
                    e.g. Facebook reducing visibility of publisher content in feeds
                Done without transparency, oversight or accountability
            Bans on Reverse Engineering
                Laws like DMCA 1201 and CFAA criminalize circumventing DRM and terms of service
                Makes it illegal to reverse engineer platforms to enable interoperability
                Tech companies use IP laws to prevent modding and adversarial interoperability
                    e.g. Apple using IP laws to prevent iOS modding
        
        Solutions
            Strengthen Antitrust Enforcement
                Block anti-competitive mergers
                Break up existing tech giants
            Pass Privacy, Labor and Consumer Protection Laws
                Comprehensive federal privacy laws with private right of action
                End worker misclassification through gig economy
                Apply consumer protection standards to platforms
            Allow Adversarial Interoperability
                Roll back laws criminalizing modding, reverse engineering
                Use government procurement to incentivize open ecosystems
                Appoint special masters to oversee platform legal threats
            Keep Interoperators in Check
                Bind interoperators to the same privacy, fair trading and labor laws
                Determined through democratic process vs corporate policy
        
        Conclusion
            We need to prepare and spread these policy ideas to capitalize on the next crisis
            Efforts are underway to enable a better internet through this approach
        
  • @friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    19
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    That was such a great video. I highly recommend everybody listen to it (there is no visual presentation so listening is enough). Great content, great delivery.

  • @ashtefere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    192 years ago

    We need more than this.

    We need a way to make sure that the internet can’t be owned, physically.

    We need some kind of easy to use and fast and robust open source alternate internet that we can all use.

    Something that somehow costs nothing to run, that has enough storage and bandwidth for everyone and everything.

    Something that has interoperability built in. Every platform should confirm to openid or openauth or activitypub or something like that.

    And you know what? we have the technology!

    We all have spare devices lying around. Old PC’s, old laptops, old phones - they could all be running some kind of node in a distributed platform of some kind of open source AWS equivalent, and let anyone host anything and post anything without getting ad-raped or data stolen.

    It’s a pipe dream of mine, and I’m sure others… but with a will and a movement we could just take it all back, all at once.

    • Rouxibeau
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      and let anyone host anything

      That’s how they’ll spin the legislation to ban it:

      Pedophiles and terrorists use that service!

      Side note – I wanted to use ‘X’ instead as a variable above, but Musk ruined that.

      • @lloram239@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That’s why you need digital signatures and authorship tracking. Copyright just by itself would already put an end to every P2P alternative or at least stop it from ever gaining any mass traction. On the other side if everybody put a digital signature under their published work, others could mirror it without themselves becoming responsible and you could have take downs of objectionable material via blacklists.

        So far very few of the P2P alternatives implement anything like that and even those that do just have arbitrary accounts that don’t link back to any real person.

        This of course goes against the whole anonymity and privacy focus that has been predominant in this field for the last 20 years. But if we actually want a real alternative to the Web, not just some toy app with a dozen users, I think it’s the only way to go. And of course you could also have a layer of indirection in there to provide some anonymity or pseudonymity, so it’s not like those things would be impossible, just reduced.

  • @Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    92 years ago

    To stop enshitification we have to kill all advertising and marketing of products online. Make the net as hostile as possible to people trying to capitalize on it.

  • @SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -22 years ago

    Just get people out of the equation if you want to stop this pattern.

    Seriously though, this is how every industry has developed throughout history.

    • @Barack_Embalmer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      👍good👍 idea💡 bro 💪 fuck🤬 😤😤😤 emogys🫠 they ruin💩 the 😌sanctity🙏 of 🧑‍💻online🌍 discourse🗣️ and∧ 😩debase😈 👩‍👩‍👦‍👦us👥 all∀

      →If➡️ I 👁️ ever see👀 another🫴 🍑emojee💯 I’m ⏰gonna🪬 💦💦💦 🍆 ⚰️ 🚾 ⚠️ ☯️🅱️ 😎😎😎

  • @Armen12@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -392 years ago

    I get the idea, but I also don’t want to go back to the days when BestGore and LiveLeak were around either, you know

    • @piyuv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      472 years ago

      Illegal content will still be illegal, no one is promoting criminal activities in this talk. Privacy and safety do not have to be mutually exclusive.

    • @hedgehogging_the_bed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      302 years ago

      Hahahaha. “Go back to”?

      Just because you don’t know what they are called today doesn’t mean those sites stopped existing. Shock and gore sites have been part of the Internet for a long time because they fill a human desire, same as porn and gambling and anything that makes your brain think you’re being naughty enough to hand out that sweet dopamine reward.

      • @Armen12@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -162 years ago

        Watching people die fills a desire to who?

        I can’t possibly imagine the kind of person that would think watching people die is somehow on par with whacking off, and gambling? I mean did you really just compare whacking it and playing slots in Vegas to watching someone get killed?

        • @spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          82 years ago

          You should do some reading on humans and violence as entertainment. It’s been a part of civilization since the beginning, homie.

        • @hedgehogging_the_bed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          Teenagers, adrenaline junkies, other thrill seekers of all sorts. People jumping out of airplanes is a popular hobby worldwide and so is controlled falling down snow-covered mountains. People get happy doing weird stuff, what can I tell you?

    • @uwe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      30
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      What are you talking about? The internet is full of people being mangled in Ukraine or shot in police footage . If anything there is more death online now than before.

      • Zorque
        link
        fedilink
        82 years ago

        Yes, but right now their experience is carefully tailored by Facebook, Google, or reddit so they don’t have to experience them.

        • @pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          Exactly. By making the internet more welcoming to advertisers, in a way we also made it more easy going. I would rather not go back to the days where just scrolling opened you up to seeing gore, goatse, or worse.

          Like it’s valid to want good moderation. I think that’s all the other person was saying

    • bioemerl
      link
      fedilink
      52 years ago

      Why? If people want to see stuff, they should be able to see stuff. Who cares if some guy wants to see some random gory video?

    • @pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      I sure agree. Don’t know how your comment managed to become so reviled.

      I appreciate aggressive banning of obviously disgusting material from the communities I’m a part of. That’s why I’m part of them.