It is endlessly frustrating that companies have universally decided that they won’t let people say “no” to stuff, ever. There are no longer options to reject stupid-ass new “features”, only postponement until next time you open the app/website/program. They’ll continue pestering you for the rest of your life. I realize that my frustration may be a little over-zealous, but we deal with these interfaces dozens of times per day and this is user hostile behavior. There isn’t really an option to just use another service or program, since the entire technology landscape has been commandeered by a few major corporations, and they all enact the same shitty things as a group.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    The tech market slowing after the end of Covid really showed these greedy fucks for who they are. Profits dropped and they all pulled out the enshittification dial for a big old twist.

    Like, can’t you just deal with being slightly less insanely rich for a few minutes?

    • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it was Vanderbilt who answered the question of “how much money is enough” with “more”. Billionaires have a hole in their soul. No amount of money will fill it, but that doesn’t stop them from trying.

      • Piers@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I suspect for most of them it’s not even about how much money they have so much as it is about optimising the rate of growth of their wealth. IE, they don’t care so much about the total amount they have so much as the amount they have coming in.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe it’s a human thing. I’ve heard the term “hedonistic treadmill” where what you once wanted becomes “meaningless” once you have it and now you’re looking to the next thing to obtain.

        The ultra wealthy wanted money, but now they “won” capitalism and need more because it literally is never enough. This goes for you and me too though, if we became billionaires we’d be looking for “what’s next?”

        • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree with your assertion that you and I would succumb to endless greed if given a large sum of money. Not everyone is built like that. Look at Tom from MySpace. He was offered hundreds of millions of dollars (not billions) for his website, took it, and fucked off to Africa to take a bunch of pictures. He pursues his hobbies now, and isn’t focused on obtaining more money he’ll never spend. He could have revamped his platform, put Facebook out of business, and pursued endless data and control, but that’s not what he was about, and I don’t think that is what most people are about. The billionaires who never have enough are broken. Something inside them is wrong.

    • alvanrahimli@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are legally obliged to, lmao. After companies become public, they have to maximize profits, if not, shareholders can simply vote to fire whomever they want. Look at every company on earth. They all with the same road. from facebook, google, to soon-to-be-public reddit.

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It think it became “mandatory” when we removed pensions from the equation and tied “everyones” retirement savings to The Market™©® so we need companies to be considerate of their stock price as it’s often our retirement that depends on it.

          Nothing like a loaded gun put to our future foreheads to make us go along with some more bullshit…

      • iopq@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is not true, since not annoying your users can mean a long time profitability

      • stealth_cookies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Fun” fact, Facebook isn’t a good example here because Zuckerberg has his shares structured so he has full control.