Software prices. : whitepeopletwitter

[–] [email protected] 54 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

The word he's describing is called "enshittification".

[–] [email protected] 26 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Enshittification has nothing to do with pricing.

It's about market capture and the resulting lack of choices allowing market holders to maximize profits by degrading product performance. This can occur even when the product has no price.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

That's part of enshittification. Step 2 of enshittification is to entice in business buyers with low prices and changes that meet their needs. Step 3 is to cut costs and start price gouging to maximize profits.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

Google is free to use. It still is. There is no price.

Facrbook, fee to use. Still is.

Both have been enshittified. There is no price being gouged.

The services they do sell are to advertisers, those costs are not being cut, they are focused on improving their targeting to attract more revenue.

Enshittification is a very simply concept; only product quality is measured. There might be price gouging but turn doesn't have to be.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 hours ago

Counterexamples: Netflix without ads, Gamepass, Tinder.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 hours ago

I think the price being gouged by Google and Facebook enshittification is your time being wasted for their own benefit. Your time and attention is what they sell after all.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] -3 points 14 hours ago

I'd say that pricing is part of the deal which can get worse. Claiming that it's not enshittification is useless nitpicking, IMHO.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

No, it's monopoly capitalism. A certain Mr. Marx from Germany had a few things to say about it.

[+] [email protected] -16 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Enshittification is a feature of capitalism, smartass.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Sure. But it's a consequence of monopolisation. Once you break up the monopolies, enshittification will no longer be economically viable.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Monopolization becomes inevitable in a capitalist economy since the wealthy are still the ones with power, and they will always seek to increase their wealth by any means necessary.

Even in a heavilly regulated form of capitalism, the wealthy will do everything in their power to slowly strip regulations over a period of time where they think people won't notice and attempt to move public opinion towards the wealthy class's benefit via propaganda.

[+] [email protected] -13 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

"You're not talking about Sprite, but about sugary soft drinks" <- that's you

[–] [email protected] 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

[+] [email protected] -10 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I was giving a name to a specific feature of capitalism and you were all "umm actually"-ing me that I'm talking about capitalism.

That's like:

Me: "I really like this chocolate croissant" You: "Actually, you're talking about a pastry 🤓"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

My point is that you were mixing up cause and effect.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

How?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

By talking about the effect (enshittification) instead of the cause (capitalism). One could read your initial comment and conclude that the only problem is enshittification, and not even think about capitalism as the cause, since you didn't mention it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I'm giving the name of a process. When someone asks for the title of a book, I don't start with Guttenberg's printing press.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

You weren't asked for anything, and this certainly isn't the equivalent of book titles and the tools to make them.

It's more like interrupting a discussion about someone who was just shot dead by police to say, "yeah, it's called being shot", then getting all pissy when someone tells you that actually, the broader issue is police brutality in general.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Do you commonly criticize comments that don't issue a historical paper on the background of a meme?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Do you commonly interpret criticism as a request for a thorough academic study?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Only if it's that kind of smartypants criticism.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

If that seems "smartypants" to you, your intellectual standards are set pretty damn low.

Mixing up cause and effect isn't some minor goof. It's the difference between eating bread and eating fire.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 hours ago

If that seems "smartypants" to you, your intellectual standards are set pretty damn low.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't insult me. The smartypants part was that you "um-actually"d me. Not that you stated something too "intellectual".

I never said "that's because of enshittification". I said "that's enshittification". My statement didn't contain any description of causal effects.

load more comments (1 replies)

[+] [email protected] -7 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

You're "trapped & can't switch".

Okay, why are you trapped?

What choices did you make to get yourself into that position?

What choices can you make now that can get you out of that position?

If you cannot answer these questions and effect positive change for yourself, then by all means yes you deserve to be trapped and abused by your overlords. Enjoy.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 19 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

You could also try to write modular software and use standardized interfaces to prevent vendor lock in. Haha who am i kidding...

[–] [email protected] 9 points 15 hours ago

Yeah but my boss told me I should use the magic API because it’s a panacea and will solve all of our problems.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 15 hours ago

The problem (outside of competence and the fact that most people only really understand one tool) is that they're deliberately architected in ways that make it difficult to operate on them the same way. They're not just different function calls; they want you to make completely different assumptions about how to do things.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (9 children)

This is kinda flawed. Most businesses need to recoup their investment, and some upfront costs going away is part of the plan to profitability.

I think this guy is confusing all "software businesses" and fortune 100 tech companies.

Edit: there are ton of businesses that make software, don't become unicorns or make billions, that survive on a product suiting some niche. To say "software companies" take crazy margins is stupid. Big tech is the issue, not software (see linux)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Software dev is still laughably less costly than hardware dev. And when done your cost drops to zero while hardware has the whole supply chain struggle indefinitely. Big (software) tech has profit margins beyond 30% for a reason.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

"when done drops to zero".

This isn't true at all. Software ages, you need to make it better to keep up with new shit. This isn't a software issue, it's a big tech/monopoly issue. Youre talking about big tech companies.

Other software exists, it's not just Instagram and tiktok.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

make it better to keep up with new shit

Sure, you cannot stick to your mature piece of software but if you're arguing new developments, then compare those to new hardware too. Far more costly and time-intensive prototyping, engineers cost pretty much the same and nowadays you get to develop firm- or software on top of it. You also cannot create low-cost income streams by implementing subscription models (well, some car vendors try but that's big tech too).

Software. Is. Cheap.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

Thats because you define software by whatever successful startup comes a unicorn. There are millions of software companies that never make a billion dollars. Theyre still a software company making a product that doesn't become free.

Youre also mixing total cost versus margin. Nobody is saying software is more expensive than hardware

load more comments (8 replies)

[+] [email protected] -17 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Use Linux?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 17 hours ago

FOSS

People Twitter