tech is not the problem, corporations are.
Agree. It’s not the tech it’s how it’s used and how business owners drive the product development and timelines.
For the past 20 years, tech has promised to make things more efficient while making almost everything more complicated and less meaningful. Innovation, for innovation’s sake, has eroded our craftsmanship, relationships, and ability to think critically.
I feel this in my bones.
They’re conflating tech with tech bros.
Tech can and does make lots of things that make our lives longer and better. Just not most of the consumer level shit that is constantly peddled by snake oil sellers. That tech is not meant to make your lives easier, it’s meant to get more money out of you without giving it up to the little people at service level.
The problem isn’t the tech, it’s the people who are controlling the tech.
The problem isn’t the tech, it’s the people who are controlling the tech.
The tech is literally made by those by people. The tech itself is in fact the problem. You will never have a version of something like social media that’s actually healthy. One way or the other someone with power will get their hands on it and abuse it.
I feel this every time I just want to see a restaurant’s menu and instead I have to pretend I’m making an online order.
Yeah, just print it and stick it on the table. Or have a tablet or something at the table if it changes frequently.
Don’t make me use my phone to look up your menu, that’s just tacky.
Tech has made things more efficient - the rewards of such are simply being funneled from the average person to the wealthy.
Maybe some tech has increased efficiency (although, when it does that increase is more often than not temporary and short lived), but there is even more “tech” that swarms that space rent seeking any time, money, or other resource saved by that increased efficiency. After the efficiencies degrade, the tech-as-a-scam persists and you end up with less efficient systems than you started with.
Yeah, just watch what AI does. The generation after Gen Alpha is going to be unable to imagine the concept of being self sustaining, and problem solving without machines. The same way Gen Z today can’t imagine the concept of just NOT having internet. Or any internet connected devices.
Tech is a tool. It can be benefitting the oligarchs and restrictive, or benefitting society and open source.
“In some parts of the city, you can’t even park your car anymore without downloading an app.”
Omg, this. I left my phone at home by accident and quickly found out that I could not pay a meter on the area I went to … You had to download an app to pay or use you phone to register a phone number and manually enter a plate and credit card.
No phone…meant no parking.
Good luck too if your phone happens to run out of battery.
Yep, technofeudalism is here.
Yeah but parking has always been bad.
You had to carry change. Meters were always out of order or would just eat your change without issuing a ticket, and the people checking never gave a shit and would give you a fine anyway.
My only complaint is the app, everyone should offer a website or an app, but if you’re going to park there a few times an app does make sense.
Neither a phone nor website would work if your phone battery is flat. The meter should at least have a way for someone to park their car if they don’t have a functioning phone, or internet access, even before the hellscape of needing a separate app for everything.
You’re in a car. There’s probably a charging port there. Sucks if you don’t have a phone, but it sucked before when you didn’t have change.
Parking has always been a privilege not a right, and if you’re not prepared you’re going to get a ticket.
I get that it’s annoying but if my phone broke and I suddenly had to pay for parking with coins, I don’t know what I’d do either. Everything is cashless now, where would I get coins from?
Yet more benefits to cycling then. Just lock it to any reasonably sturdy object.
Times change. I see nothing wrong with it. Same as you used to be able to park without paying, then you started to pay, and now it’s moving from those machines to phone apps. And in the future there may be other form of pay, or maybe parking is directly forbidden o who knows what but there will be a change, for sure. Because things change.
It’s just nostalgia working. Things change. You were more capable of dealing with change at a younger age and that’s why you see the older the people get the more they complain about everything.
But is just a change, like many other that came before that.
deleted by creator
I’m tired of people seeing everything as binary good or bad. We have more than two brain cells, and life isn’t a fucking meme.
I understand the complaint, but the big picture of tech has a ton of upside.
Tech itself is not the issue. How it’s applied is the issue.
Once tech takes hold, there is massive pressure to monetize the asset.
That’s where this complaint lives. Amazing advance becomes ubiquitous, then two things inevitably occur. Companies are formed that apply the technology on unnecessary and unpopular ways (parking app is a perfect example) or the pressure to make more more MORE MONEY triggers the enshittification spiral, where “wow, you can print wirelessly now!?” becomes “my printer won’t take any cartridges but brand name, and I have to watch an unskippable 30-second ad every time I print now??!!!”
It follows that as tech saturates our lives, the inevitability of enshittification will also saturate our lives.
The year is 2044, you don’t feel old but the ticker is starting to skip several beats a day. Your doctor is forced to use the product at his disposal to help you, which is the PaceXMaker produced by the Tesla-Cola conglomerate. The device is a true miracle of modern science. The size of a fingernail, it pulses electricity into your heart in carefully measured bursts to support proper function of all valves, and ensures that any plaque is dissolved harmlessly away. Your iEye tracks the device status, and alerts you when it starts to run low on fuel, a proprietary enzyme designed by Tesla-Cola. When the iEye app notifies you that the enzyme is running low, simply crack open an ice cold, refreshing can of Tesla Cola Zero to refuel your device for another two hours. Need to sleep? We got you. Hook up the Tesla Cola Zero-Venous BeautyRest to your ArmDock (patent pending) for up to five hours of relaxing enzyme replenishment. You can remove the arm dock after you confirm six ad-watch minute credits on your iEye.
Tesla-Cola: We Got You
Transmetropolitan had in-dream advertising. I think you got it from breathing in some sort of gas when walking around in public.
The most unrealistic thing about the Transmetropolitan series was the fact that Spider was able to make a living as a journalist.
I would say Tech with a capital T includes not just physical or cloud tech, but the whole process, down to shitty Product Owners and business teams, delivery crap features to customers.
…always with the verification cans.
Tech itself is not the issue. How it’s applied is the issue.
At this point, I would argue that technology is the issue. Or, at least, the current iteration of it.
Internal Combustion Engines, always-on internet connections, and digital financial systems are generating real physical hazards that stretch beyond their benefits. This isn’t just an issue of use. There is no “proper” method of employing - for instance - cryptocurrency or single-use plastics or a statewide surveillance network that doesn’t result in a degradation of quality of life for the population at large. To take a more dramatic angle, there’s no safe application of a nuclear bomb.
When the iEye app notifies you that the enzyme is running low, simply crack open an ice cold, refreshing can of Tesla Cola Zero to refuel your device for another two hours. Need to sleep? We got you.
Except this isn’t a technological innovation, its a Science Fantasy. iEye isn’t a real thing. Tesla Cola Zero isn’t a real thing. Not needing sleep isn’t a real thing. You’re not a cyborg and you will never be a cyborg.
But the science fantasy is still having its own cost. People are making real material nationally-transformative (or de-transformative) decisions based on the fantastic promises we’ve been sold about Tomorrow. We’re underdeveloping our mass transit infrastructure and relying entirely too much on unregulated air travel to speed up travel. At the same time, we’re clinging to old bunker-fuel laden container ships and decimating the aquatic ecology, because we refuse to adapt proven nuclear powered shipping that’s over 60 years old at this point. We’re investing more and more and more money in digital surveillance and personal tracking. We’re off-loading our ability to collect and process information to unreliable digital tools (LLMs being only the latest in overhyped AI as a replacement for professionalized human labor). And then we’re trying to justify the bad decisions we make as a result by claiming secret wisdom inherent in machines.
We’re eating our seed corn after being told technologists will eliminate our need to eat ever again.
This is a direct result of technological developments we have made (or promised to make and failed to deliver) over the last twenty years. Revolutions in racial profiling, viral marketing, planned obsolescence, military expansionism, and genocide have not improved our quality of life in any material sense.
The cow has not benefited from industrial agriculture. And the prole has not benefited from de-skilling of labor.
Author is one step away from the realization that Capitalism is the culprit, and technology is just the vector.
Tech =/= megacorps
That’s like saying food doesn’t make the world better where you mean food industry megacorps producing hunger & poverty.
As someone who grew up before the negative effects of computer/internet technology became apparent, and who was excited and impatient for it to develop, I agree with the points made in the article. It didn’t have to be this way; in a different kind of society it could have been a boon to everyone. But in our society all the benefits of good things are appropriated by the powerful so they can more readily exploit the less powerful for profit.
So many wonderful possible benefits that might have come from these technological advancements, to help people lead better lives, to address many of society’s issues (hunger, climate change, disabilities, education, etc) simply never happened, because in our society money must be invested to develop them, so only things that would make more profits for the greedy were able to be developed. Yes, some things did get funded by governments or foundations, but they’re only a drop in the bucket to what could be done.
It didn’t have to be this way; in a different kind of society it could have been a boon to everyone.
Please continue to espouse this viewpoint even under serious argument from those opposing it. Technology isn’t inevitably shit. There are other types of software we can write, and other types of technology we can develop that isn’t the result of some sweaty CTO hovering over our shoulders demanding that we make the world shittier for the sake of the shareholders.
We have to imagine the worlds we could’ve created through better choices. We have to imagine that we can change the course of things.
Well said.
I disagree about such a generalization.
There are very few instances where people decide to be dumb and use technology for it but in general my life is much better thanks to technology.
My job exists due to technology, the Internet allows me to work from home, a washing machine washes my clothes, I can order food in the middle of a meeting and have it delivered on my lunch pause, I can speak to my family half a world away everyday, with video, for free, I can have the answer to any question in seconds from my a tiny device in my pocket, my car brakes automatically if I’m distracted (and heats up before I sit down in the morning)… you get the deal.
I hear you, but the writer isn’t concerned with “can”: If you replaced “can have the answer to any question in seconds from my a tiny device in my pocket” with “must” then you can see their dissatisfaction.
if I went to a restaurant and was told that I had to install and use their app to order their food, I would fucking leave. If it was the only restaurant left in town then I’d have much less choice in the matter. The insidious nature of technology is that it changes “can” with “must”.
if I went to a restaurant and was told that I had to install and use their app to order their food, I would fucking leave. If it was the only restaurant left in town then I’d have much less choice in the matter. The insidious nature of technology is that it changes “can” with “must”.
That’s not really the fault of technology though, that’s the fault of how companies are implementing technology through their policies and procedures.
Companies can have stupid, arbitrary rules and requirements and policies and do stupid or harmful actions regardless of technology or not.
I don’t think it’s fair to blame tech for company policies.
…but just like you chided the person you replied to, none of that is true or real. The restaurant that forces you to use their app doesn’t exist, and it’s not the only restaurant in town. None of that is even because of technology, it’s because of capitalism.
The restaurant that forces you to use their app doesn’t exist
Here is one such restaurant (have to use their website via QR code, but same idea) near where I live: https://maps.app.goo.gl/6LhBMo5duVzSB9HE9
That said, it’s clearly not the only restaurant in town, and nobody is forcing a gun to your head to eat there.
I agree, and good for you for leaving the restaurant. You could open a competing restaurant that doesn’t use apps and let people vote with their wallets. It’s not the nature of technology, its the decision of some people who are bad at knowing their customers. I don’t “have to” wash my clothes in the washing machine, but you bet I won’t even think about doing it manually. Forcing the use of an app is like only offering a vegan selection. If your customer didn’t ask for it you are going to have a bad time. If you are the only place in town is a monopoly problem, and a different discussion.
Having to use an app to order food might be slightly annoying, but it beats working 12h a day in the field to feed my familiy. It’s the firstest of first world problems.
In fantasy land you can open a competing restaurant. Back here on earth not only is that not an option for 99% of the population, most people are stuck with the couple choices they have in town and when tech comes in and forces the enshitificstion of services in order to pump stock price you’re stuck just eating this shit forever. That’s the problem. You seem to believe in “the invisible hand of the free market” when that simply doesn’t exist. Consumers aren’t rational. Investors aren’t rational. And the market is anything but free. Big tech is working really hard to make sure they have a stranglehold on every industry to make it worse and trap people into using their platforms.
most people are stuck with the couple choices they have in town and when tech comes in and forces the enshitificstion of services in order to pump stock price you’re stuck just eating this shit forever.
Is that the fault of the technology, though, or is that the fault of the companies?
Companies can have stupid, arbitrary rules and requirements and policies and do stupid or harmful actions regardless of technology or not.
I don’t think it’s fair to blame tech for company policies.
I keep hearing about it’s just “fault of companies” as if companies weren’t lead by the tech bros. By that logic all the pollution BP and other oil companies cause is just company decisions ! It’s not the fault of oil that greedy oil barons exist… yet it’s the burning oil causing the pollution (admittedly not best example but sort of holds)
Often times the tech companies try to “disrupt” a particular industry by providing a tech based approach and then lobbying the legacy business out of existence thus limiting your choices. This is why the tech enshitification works, because there is no real competition. The uber wealthy simply force feed you what they want. Uber, Netflix, and Amazon all operated at a loss specifically to be able to starve out legitimate businesses and limit your choice to only what they provide. Now we don’t have much of independent book stores, taxis outside of big metro hubs, and god only knows what’s going on with streaming service prices.
The ultimate fuck you from modern tech is the “if you don’t like it, don’t use it” while at the same time they work tirelessly for their tech “solution” to be the only choice.
So yea a ton of tech sucks and exists only to extract value out of its users and not solve any concrete issue
Again, tech doesn’t FORCE anything, people choose to fuck customers (and workers) and sometimes happen to use tech as an excuse. You don’t need any tech to raise prices or lower wages, and those are some of the biggest problem we have. Whether I use an app or coins to pay for my parking is not the issue.
In a world with lobbyists, monopolies, big corporations donating billions to politicians, a QR code is nowhere near the top of the problem list.
And consumers are quite rational, the go consistently for the cheapest option that fulfills their need. You see it in online services, electronics, flights, etc.
Surely you can have your cake and eat it too, right?
I don’t understand the question…
If consumers were rational Tesla stock wouldn’t be where it is, meme coins wouldn’t exist, nft craze wouldn’t have happened (btw all examples of tech spending money to trick dumb people). Consumers routinely DO NOT go for the cheapest possible option but frequently get tricked by stupid gimmicks and smoke and mirrors. For example - Colgate started wrapping their toothpaste boxes in a clear plastic that sparkles under grocery store lights. Despite raising prices, introducing wasteful plastic, and increased packaging costs they increased market share and profits - that’s not rational. You seem to have been sold on libertarian delusions.
I never mentioned salaries and I very distinctly did mention that majority of the people in the world live in smaller communities with limited choices. If a tech overlord buys out their businesses (e.g buying all local newspaper and replacing them with mostly ai slop and agenda articles) there are not many alternatives. Insisting that because you have some choice in some matters it means everyone does is naive … and also another example of an irrational consumer lol
Consumers don’t buy stock, and deifnieltely not enough to influence trillion dollar company valuation, let’s begin with that.
I never said they go for “the cheapest option, period”. They are willing to spend extra if they get perceived, or real, value, like aestelhetics (your example) , social status (cars for instance) or functionality (iPhone).
I’m very far from libertarian, so let’s abstain about speculating about each other’s beliefs and let’s talk about ideas.
Majaority of people in the world do NOT live in smaller communities, first, and tech only increases choices, second, so even if the first was true it’s still an argument in favor of tech. I can get the new York times (or the helsingin sanomat) in the smallest village of Germany, again thanks to technology.
So you’re just gonna make stuff up as you feel it’s true?
“Consumers do not buy stock” lol yes they do “iPhone can be the cheapest option” (as long as you don’t care how much you spend and it has perceived value” “Tech only increases choices” (biggest laugh I had in a while) “Most people in the world do not live in smaller communities”
Fucking lol my dude. Sounds like you’re really projecting your life into facts of the world which is a common disease among programmers.
You know that places outside of US exist right? You know that the tech created in US cities disproportionately adversely affects 3rd world countries. If you ignore all that and go full bootlick mode on tech oligarchs then yes all you say is true, but back in the real world you couldn’t be further off base
This is the problem with capitalism. What a sick world view.
The solution is… more monopolies? Please enlighten me.
How was that your takeaway from this thread
You attack capitalism in an article about tech, so let’s ask how is that your takeaway, then I’ll answer.
First of all, follow the thread brother, I’m not the same person you originally replied to.
Second of all, this article is just as much about capitalism as it is about “tech”. If you actually read the article and just thought “this is just about tech” and not “this is about tech and how it has leaked unnecessarily into nearly every transaction”, then IDK what to tell you
but it beats working 12h a day in the field to feed my familiy.
btw, people didn’t work 12 h a day in the field
the long work days are a result of capitalism. yes, progress has increased average work hours, instead of decreasing them.
People back then didn’t have Healthcare, cars or iPhones. I like all of those.
Communist countries work even longer hours, look for instance 996 in China.
I agree. Tech is like fire, handle it responsibly.
lunch pause
car brakes automatically if I’m distracted
These two lines paint a very sad picture.
What’s sad about a lunch pause? Do I need to keep working 8 hours straight?
Or about a car braking automatically? I has saved me twice in four years, I was looking to see if someone was coming from one direction while the guy in front of me braked suddenly. Car stopped before I rear ended the other guy.
I must be missing something…
Yeah, idk what the other guy was talking about. But, I’ve ridden with someone that apparently got dependent on that automatic braking feature. He “used” something like 5 times during a 1.5 hour trip.
That sounds super uncomfortable, the emergency braking is quite brutal…
The sad part as I read it is that you actually have to work 8 hours at all. Productivity has increased more than thrice in the last few decades, yet, the early industrialization 8+ hours are still the norm while it has been proven to be unproductive for most jobs and defiantly unhealthy. Or at least that is what I interpret into it. There are different models of work breaks, I think the french have a somewhat long lunch break because they celebrate it more while other work cultures are more on the nutrition acquisition road
I don’t have to, I could go half-day and have a decent living, maybe downsizing the house a bit, but I like the big house and the fast car, and the sushi for lunch.
I think you hit the head on the nail.
I prefer the saying “technology is a tool and a tool can be used for good or evil” or something like that
You can use a hammer to hammer nails or to injure someone
Technology can make the world better if its in the right hands for example open source hardware & software
“La science sans conscience n’est que ruine de l’âme”
You could say the same thing about splitting atoms.
That’s also technology. Used for good and evil.
The internet peaked in utility around 2004. Most, if not all, developments since then have only made things worse
I do think you’re right. Friendster and MySpace were pretty much the peak, then when real social media took over, it all went to shit. Since then, tech exists not to perform some function but to justify its existence specifically to earn money.
I think in terms of cultural exchange of ideas and the enjoyment of being on the internet, 2005-2015 or so was probably the best. The barrier to entry was lowered to where almost anyone could make a meme or post a picture or upload a video or write a blog post or even a microblog post or forum comment of a single sentence and it might go viral through the power of word of mouth.
Then when there was enough value in going viral people started gaming for that as a measure of success, so that it no longer was a reliable metric for quality.
But plenty of things are now better. I think maps and directions are better with a smartphone. Access to music and movies is better than ever. It’s nice to be able to seamlessly video chat with friends and family. There’s real utility there, even if you sometimes have to work around things that aren’t ideal.
This era was before smartphones and always-online lifestyle. Being always online is a prerequisite to the attention economy.
So, yes, you’re right that the best internet was back then. Back when we could leave it at home and go out into the world knowing everybody else had also left it at home.
Laptops are an obvious exception back then, but almost nobody took their laptop to the bar with them, or to a concert, or on a hike, or to the grocery store. And the trouble of pulling it out and trying to find WiFi meant that it wasn’t easy enough to distract the majority.
I was thinking about this the other day, while loading music onto my modded iPod. If I could go back in time and stick a pin in tech growth, it would be 2006, before the iPhone came along. Don’t get me wrong, I think the explosion in smartphones that came after the first iPhone is broadly good and has the ability to be democratising. But that’s not really what shook out.
The world in 2006 had digital cameras and small, portable music players. We had SMS for easily staying in touch with each other, and we did have smartphones - just not as smart as they are now. From a communication perspective, we mostly had what we needed. Hell, by 2006 3G connections were pretty universal, so we could do video calling if we had a phone that supported it. Having a bunch of devices that all did specific things meant that we spread our reliance around a number of companies. Now, with our camera, MP3 player, computer, and communication device all being controlled by one company, if that company turns to shit we have to jump to a less shitty firm, but we have to abandon all of the conveniences to which we’ve grown accustomed.
As someone who recently jumped from 15 years of iOS to GrapheneOS, this last one is particularly painful.
And sure, everything has gotten a lot faster since then, but there’s a part of me that kind of enjoys the inconvenience of slower, finicky hardware that sometimes needs a nudge in the right direction.
I dont know… This Linux thing is pretty great, IMO.
I get their point, but it feels like it’s more about tech being abused by large corporations, trying to squeeze another cent out of you.
I feel like that’s the entire point of the article. These technological “solutions” are being forced on us more and more and they are often I’ll conceived. Like QR ordering only systems.
Technology absolutely helps advance science and helps the disabled, It’s greedy fucks that destroyed good tech
Tech isn’t the problem. It’s the people in charge of it. It’s the capitalism/neo-feudalism controlling the politics.
