548
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 202 points 1 month ago

Another way to encourage interoperability is to use the government to hold out a carrot in addition to the stick. Through government procurement laws, governments could require any company providing a product or service to the government to not interfere with interoperability. President Lincoln required standard tooling for bullets and rifles during the Civil War, so there’s a long history of requiring this already. If companies don’t want to play nice, they’ll lose out on some lucrative contracts, “but no one forces a tech company to do business with the federal government.”

That's actually a very interesting idea. This benefits the govt as much as anyone else too. It reduces switching costs for govt tech.

[-] Benjaben@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago

Can confirm, I've worked for a company doing govt contract work and I really don't know what it'd take for us to have walked away. They can dictate whatever terms they like and still expect to find plenty of companies happy to bid for contracts I think.

[-] errer@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

It’s because they pay big dollars for comparatively little work with little validation of the quality of said work.

[-] Benjaben@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

That hasn't been quite my experience. For one thing, they cap their pay and don't (can't) negotiate like a private client. So generally less money per given project.

Comparatively little work and little validation also wasn't my experience but I do get the sense it used to be more common, and it did feel like the experience I had was in some sense a reaction to previous contractors taking advantage.

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Did you also have a robustly enshittified consumer business?

I’m thinking of his classic users —> advertisers —> shareholders model and struggling to come up with companies that have that model but also thrive on government contracts.

Yelp is a pretty classic case of enshittification. What government contracts do they have?

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

DoD already started this with their Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA).

And I agree, the government should use its power to force interoperable and open standards wherever possible and relevant.

[-] demesisx@infosec.pub 11 points 1 month ago

Self driving vehicles are one area I’d like to see that style of standards applied.

[-] MagnumDovetails@lemmy.world 122 points 1 month ago

I like Doctorow, and these point are valid. I just don’t see the American government doing anything to benefit the people, regardless of left or right orientation. Most Americans want abortion access and reasonable restrictions on gun sales; I can’t imagine any candidates, local or federal doing little more than making empty promises on these subjects. Even Obama care is a hugely compromised husk of reasonable healthcare for all, and you still have republicans clamoring to dismantle it.

I hate to be pessimistic, but I don’t think any American politician would take on this topic.

[-] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 27 points 1 month ago

I don’t think any American politician would take on this topic.

That's the feature

[-] General_Effort@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

The FTC under Biden has begun to push back against tech monopolies.

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

The Supreme Court overturning the Chevron doctrine could stop that pretty quick

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hikermick@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Don't "both sides" this. It's the kind of thing people use to justify voting third party. Off the top of my head the Biden admin has been working to restore net neutrality and has an antitrust case against Ticketmaster and Live Nation

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Corgana@startrek.website 7 points 1 month ago

What you've expressed is not pessimism it's cynicism.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I hate to be pessimistic, but I don’t think any American politician would take on this topic.

it's only pessimism if it's not true and there are plenty of demonstrably true public examples to guarantee that this isn't pessimism; it's reality that sounds like pessimism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 58 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
  1. Lack of competition in the market via mergers and acquisitions
  1. Companies change things on the back end (“twiddle their knobs”) to improve their fortunes and have a united, consolidated front to prevent any lawmaking that might constrain them
  1. Companies then embrace tech law to prevent new entrants into the market or consumer rights (see: DMCA, etc.)

This is the criteria he has laid out for the "enshitifacation" of the Internet.

This is funny to me because this is the exact pattern of every industry and service in the United States ever. The Internet isn't special, it's just the latest frontier for capitalism.

[-] demizerone@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

The corporations have been doing this with housing. I live in CA and it is awful how many unhoused there are now, and the supreme Court made it illegal!I hope one day this will finally be the last straw for the uprising.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 42 points 1 month ago

The danger here is that they make "open" standards so horrendously complex and ever evolving that only the billionaire mega corporations can can realistically keep up with them.

See the web where Google now control it completely by having such an enormous amount of code that even Microsoft couldn't be arsed to keep up, or Office Open XML, where 100% compatibility is limited to exactly one product: The one that made it. I just downloaded the documentation for the standard. It is over 5000 fucking pages long. That was part 1 of 4.

[-] Barzaria@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago

I think that this is the reason that the rust programming language exists: to make learning the skill too hard for a regular person.

[-] HelloHotel@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

My favorate quote about the language is, "it feels like rust was made by people who hate uncertan behavor." Languages with manual memory management are harder. On top of that, Rust demands you prove your memory management is 'correct'.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Programming is already too hard for a regular person

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Yes, most humans have trouble putting what they want into logical step-by-step instructions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Another example here is the Matrix protocol, specifically designed from the ground up to be open and distributed. In reality, the only option for full-featured stable server software is the one maintained by the project itself, and there aren't a lot of third party clients available.

Openness itself is a good goal, but the complexity itself can pose a barrier openness.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 39 points 1 month ago

I loved the net when you had to have a clue to be there.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Chronographs@lemmy.zip 32 points 1 month ago

This is nice and all but any solution requires a government captured by capital to work against capital feels as likely to work as thoughts and prayers.

[-] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 41 points 1 month ago

Better than completely allowing capital to do whatever it wants without even attempting to push back.

[-] DJDarren@thelemmy.club 10 points 1 month ago

But what if some change in the right direction doesn't fix everything immediately? Then what?

May as well just not bother.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 month ago

Yup. All of these "solutions" that sound original are known. The reason we don't apply them isn't because we don't know how to solve these issues, it's because capital has pulled the handbrake. This is the problem we have to solve. All the other problems fall downstream and will magically start getting solved if we can release the handbrake. If we're not talking about how to reduce regulatory capture, we're not taking about real solutions.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago

Interoperability is how we “seize the means of computation.”

Good luck with that. If the success of the iPhone has taught me anything it is that the average person loves them some incompatible with anything but itself vertical integration.

[-] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Friendly reminder: Dotorow's wife is a director of a Disney subsidiary highly likely to be involved with DRM.

Ms Taylor is now the Director, StudioLab at The Walt Disney Studios. In that role she is responsible for ensuring that Disney continues to invest in the intersection between online tech and content distribution.

EDIT: You all are reading way too far into me bringing this up. Didn't say this to invalidate his point, mostly wanted to highlight something that I find most people don't know about him. It's something I think is important considering how much he styles himself as an idealogue/icon for technological freedom. He still makes good points, but the position he's doing it from should be known is all.

[-] knova@infosec.pub 35 points 1 month ago

Does that invalidate his point regarding enshittification?

I think it might matter if Cory came out and said, I am starting an org with the resources to fix it. But I don’t see how this tidbit is relevant for a guy who coined the term about what’s happening here and has been beating the drum about the problem.

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Yeah this feels like a “no true Scot” fallacy to me, where anything he says should be invalid because of his wife’s position, which is false

[-] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago

Only if you take it that way. I've said nothing about his point being questionable, and it wasn't my intent.

For me this is more about that his status as a free software/internet icon for well over a decade should be tempered, if only slightly, by knowledge of what pays his bills.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago

Cory has self styled and been treated as a free software icon for well over a decade. The whole enshittification thing is just the latest thing to bring him back into the public eye.

It doesn't invalidate his point whatsoever, but it's important to know that what pays his bills is all.

[-] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 13 points 1 month ago

Is he, or has he ever been, a communist or associated with communists! We demand an answer!

[-] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago

Lol, no. Also, big diff between associating with and being actively married to.

Anyway I've edited my comment and I'll repeat tye edit here: You all are reading way too far into me bringing this up. Didn't say this to invalidate his point, mostly wanted to highlight something that I find most people don't know about him. It's something I think is important considering how much he styles himself as an idealogue/icon for technological freedom. He still makes good points, but the position he's doing it from should be known is all.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

You do know you can be married to someone and not agree with their politics, yes?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I don't have a stake in this argument, as this is my first time learning about Doctorow. I just want to add that a good phrase to express the situation you described is "potential conflict of interest."

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] yesman@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

Through no intervention or design, the market creates perverse incentives that only benefit a few. So the solution is to fiddle with the incentives?

Ya ever notice that "market reform" schemes always seem like negotiations with an angry god? Sometimes I think that ancient civilizations would be much better understood if we stopped referring to the "priest class" and started calling them economists.

[-] NutWrench@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

I think the best way to make the Internet less sh*tty is to get away from Google search.

I like the SearX search engine. It gives old-school, relevant search results, not google ranked ones.

https://search.inetol.net/

It's also spread out over many separate instances, so you can pick the one that best suits your search needs:

https://searx.space/

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Zip2@feddit.uk 7 points 1 month ago

Am I the only one that really detests the word “enshittification”? It feels like someone couldn’t be bothered to look up the correct term and lots of other lazy people ran with it.

Mind you, that feels like modern language in a nutshell.

[-] LazerFX@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 month ago

It was a term coined to describe the step-by-step process modern tech platforms go through:

  1. be good, get customers, grow
  2. get large enough to corner market, concentrate on profits
  3. get large enough to move to politicise their approach, drive out competition through aggressive tactics, and lock in consumers
  4. drive more profit through dark patterns and ensure nobody wins but the stakeholders

It's specifically that, and there wasn't a word that described that process previously, as it's only something that's possible in a modern, "web scale" worldwide platform.

[-] Zip2@feddit.uk 4 points 1 month ago

Maybe I’m just thinking the crudeness of the term is downplaying the seriousness somewhat.

I’ll award virtual internet points that you can redeem for absolutely nothing to anyone who can come up with a better term.

[-] kureta@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Too late. it is a widely used term with a very specific meaning now. that's language for you. not just modern language. all of language.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I mean its a bombasticatic term for "capital accumulation" in the tech sector. Or, more accurately, the effects of capital accumulation and monopoly in the tech sector.

[-] WamGams@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

I like Cory Doctorow.

However, I bought the novel Rabbits solely because Doctorow had a front cover blurb praising the novel.

It was downright a bad novel. Doctorow owes me $16.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
548 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59475 readers
2640 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS