I'm Tired of Pretending Tech is Making the World Better
I'm tired of pretending tech makes things better. I'm tired of kidding myself that all these apps, these chatbots, these "tools" are doing anything but dragging us into the mud and the shit and calling it progress. I sat down at a cafe a few days ago, hungry and ready
Author is one step away from the realization that Capitalism is the culprit, and technology is just the vector.
So many are...
Tech isn’t the problem. It’s the people in charge of it. It’s the capitalism/neo-feudalism controlling the politics.
Consumer technology I can see being very toxic and also toxic for the environment because people don’t know how to recycle or purchase correctly. Commercial tech like IoT is going to help save the planet and support the majority with them knowing.
We'd all be better off if we learned to question tech as a gift and see it for its grift.
Open-source technology absolutely is making the world better.
Open source analytics tools are still pushing for ad-driven business models that make the world (and the content) worse. Open source LLMs still waste computational power and pollute. And the list continues. Some open source technologies serve a good goal, some contribute to make the world as bad as some non-OSS.
People forget that technology is agnostic to morals and ideals. Which is a big part of why I support FOSS. It is tech with goals that do aim for accessibility and making the world better. I am not a huge donator as I don't make much money, nor can I code well, but I donate and contribute where I can.
technology has the potential to make life so much better, there are two problems.
Tech that makes life better, usually doesn't create much value. Because it's either, already been created, and if it has, it's probably enshittified by now.
Go use open source FOSS tech, it's great. Contribute to the improvement of society by not using terrible technology and begin using good technology, it's free!
I had an Amazon bot lie to me. I told it some item didn't show up and I wanted a replacement. It said it would send one and it would show up in my orders. It never did. So I requested a refund later. So tedious.
You see, it actually did still save you time from finding a local shop that sells it and interacting with your neighbor
Yeah my neighbors suck
Technology absolutely helps advance science and helps the disabled, It’s greedy fucks that destroyed good tech
Yeah I think blanket statements either way are misguided. Some tech does help the disabled, other tech makes their lives much more difficult. It's like any other tool, when it's used at scale by something aiming for optimizing profit it will have terrible side effects
sure, some tech makes life more difficult, but it'd be weird to require it's use, so you're either going to go through a bad government structure (different problem) or choose to use bad products for some reason.
I guess the secret third answer is working somewhere that requires you to use shitty tech, but like, same problem as no 1.
I find the bigger problem to be implementation and support, shit like QR codes and phone based payment taking over things like paper, and card based payment, that's objectively worse. Though both QR codes and phone based payment are in isolation, explicitly good and beneficial things.
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
Agreed, but things act differently at scale and it's not like there's 10 billion+ hammers being used at the same time, almost all of the time, for years on end
"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.
I think this headline is slightly misleading. Here are some better ones:
This is weird take on an op-ed. OP didn't alter the title. The only ways I can conceive of a headline being "misleading" is when it declares a falsity (this doesn't; it's an opinion) or doesn't match the content of the titled text (this doesn't; it matches the text).
Wait. Is this satire? Like these suggested versions have been generated by running through a LLM AI?
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
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.
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.
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.
..always with the verification cans.
Anytime I have to replace a device I find it incredibly frustrating. It certainly seems like technology is regressing. I've had the same phone since 2016 because nothing I've looked at has enough of it has to replace it and doesn't offer anything better to make up for those deficiencies. My mouse recently developed an issue that had me looking at potential replacements and again almost nothing currently available matches it or was even close. I found two that were potentially not a downgrade and one of those had awful reviews. Instead I'm just buying the part to fix it and hopefully I'll be able to keep limping it along for the foreseeable future. Same goes for my car. Nothing new that I've seen appeals to me. They're all loaded down with infotainment bullshit that's just a pain in the ass to deal with. Those were just 3 off the top of my head. At least with software you can usually find something open source that does what you want, but if it has to be manufactured by someone else you can forget about it.
My mouse recently developed an issue that had me looking at potential replacements and again almost nothing currently available matches it or was even close.
I used the exact same Logitech MX518 mouse from ~2009 until ~2020. Then I went through one every 9 months or so until they succumbed to same problems with the scrollwheel failing until I finally had to stop buying their crap.
Yea, this one is actually a Logitch 602 I've had for years, and it's my 3rd one after two warranty replacements so the build quality has always been questionable but I love the button layout on this mouse and the software is usually pretty good at doing what I want so I'm dreading having to replace it. There was apparently another similar one that came out a couple years ago but they don't make them anymore and from what I was reading the quality was garbage too. I still have the one from the second time I replaced it through the warranty so I'm going to replace the problematic switches on it and see how that goes.
On my small fleet of Logi M570 trackball mice, I occasionally have to crack them open and tweezer out the wreath of hair that has built up in the mouse wheel which obscures the sensor. It'll be a mix of mine and my cats hair.
tech is not the problem, corporations are.
More specifically, it's capitalism that is the problem, not tech.
Agree. It's not the tech it's how it's used and how business owners drive the product development and timelines.
I kinda agree with the article, I genuinely think humanity peaked with the computer of the PS2 era. Or maybe it had something to do with the patriot act. Just feels like after that things had gotten worse substantially
I saw the writing on the wall when we started getting itunes updates that no one wanted.
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.
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.
lunch pause
car brakes automatically if I'm distracted
These two lines paint a very sad picture.
I think you hit the head on the nail.
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...
I agree. Tech is like fire, handle it responsibly.
Imagine VR so real that someone severely allergic to cats can know what it's like to give one scritches and feel it purr. Imagine someone who is paraplegic knowing what it's like to swim or climb a mountain. Now imagine how much money Mark Zuckerberg will make when it's $22.95/month with ads and requires you to put in your Social Security Number.
Tech =/= megacorps
That's like saying food doesn't make the world better where you mean food industry megacorps producing hunger & poverty.
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.
I watched a documentary about the Unabomber and had the same thought
I'm tired of pretending companies are making the world better.
See:
The corporation
The new corporation
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.
Literally just one billionaire could end world hunger. It's such an easy way to go to history forever as a good guy. But they all become corrupt in the soul as soon as they have more than they can use. It's a systematic problem and the problem is the demonic capitalist entities known as the megacorps
Well said.
Thanks Adam Smith...
My phone struggled to load the site to order a single cold brew, pop-ups to install the custom App kept obscuring the options, and I had to register with my phone number, email address, and first and last name to buy a $5 cup of coffee.
Then walk out. Don't reward the bullshit with your money. The coffee shop ain't gonna give a shit if you keep buying coffee just to go home and complain on your blog.
Came here to say this. I will never be compelled to install an app on my phone by an eatery the first time I go there. That is severely hostile design. Don’t willingly inconvenience yourself just to freely provide them your tracking info to sell.
Or.. ask the staff for a menu, order with them, respectfully let them know how you feel about the qr/app thing (unlikely it was their decision to implement but they can pass on the complaint), and if they're unwilling to take your order (which is hopefully unlikely at this point) feel free to make a little stink (if you feel inclined) and walk out. Still ok to complain on your blog about being spammed with the app but I'd rather try the obvious options first rather than expect the owners to heuristically discover via non-returning customers that we really don't want the app.
That is, if the coffee/food/service is good, otherwise yea fuck em
Boy do I have a story for you.
I tried to order a quesadilla from chipotle. An online exclusive. Turns out online ordering for the location nearest me was broken so I went in and explained that I was unable to order it, and I asked if I can just get one anyway. They flat out said no.
They refused to sell me a cheese quesadilla simply because it wasn’t ordered through their app/site which was broken. I just left and got food somewhere else.
I’ve been boycotting chipotle ever since.
That's assuming the employees give enough of a shit to pass the feedback on to the owners, and that the owners give enough of a shit to listen.
Yeah, it's better if you make it known why you're not giving them your business, but if it doesn't appreciably impact their revenue then most owners won't care either way.
"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.
Yet more benefits to cycling then. Just lock it to any reasonably sturdy object.
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.
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.
Yep, I also been growing older and I have nostalgia for old times. But I'm well aware that grass is only greener on my memory, as it has always been.
Yes and no. It’s objectively true that things like streaming services, food delivery, and online communications got worse not better over time. It’s not true for all things but there are definitely things that simply got worse for profit
That's not tech. That's company policies.
Streaming services, as a tech has evolved and it's a better technology that it was before. New encoding formats allow for transfer of more data over less bandwidth for instance.
Online communications, as in forums as such, as also evolved with new and better ways of posting, and better security (I remember when websites just stored your password in plain text).
What people complain about are mostly company policies, not technology. Netflix charging more for less content, or Reddit banning third party apps are not tech. Those things are not developed. They are just a company decision.
And company decisions are as bad as always. People also got screw by companies in the 90s. People who just notice more now is because now they are older.
I don't agree. Technology in itself is not helpful nor harmful. It's a tool like a hammer or a knife or a pen and a block of paper.
I agree if one says that technology makes it easier to do harm.:) People and their motives and actions are the same as always, since the stone age and ago.
Tech speeds things up. If you want to do good, it'll help you do it faster. If you want to do evil, it'll help you do it faster.
A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention with the possible exceptions of handguns and Tequila.
—Mitch Ratcliffe
in my opinion, at this point of history, FAST is inherently detrimental. Only those with privilege and resources are able to adapt to rapid changes and reap their benefits, while the rest are left behind.
Which changes rules, but not the resulting balance or lack thereof.
Yep.
I think when most people say something like “technology is making the world worse” they mean the technology as it actually exists and as it is actually developing, not the abstract sense of possible futures that technology could feasibly deliver.
That is clearly what the author of the piece meant.
If the main focus of people who develop most technology is getting people more addicted to their devices so they are easier to exploit then technology sucks. If the main focus is to generate immoral levels of waste to scam venture capitalists and idiots on the internet then technology sucks. If the main focus is to use technology to monetize every aspect of someone’s existence, then I think it is fair to say that technology, at this point in history, sucks.
Saying “technology is neutral” is not super insightful if, in the present moment, the trend in technological development and its central applications are mostly evil.
Saying “technology is neutral” is worse than unhelpful if, in the present moment, the people who want to use technology to harm others are also using that cliche to justify their antisocial behavior.
When the discussion is about whether technology + an unregulated human society is likely to end badly, then there is not much to discuss.
There are real life test series. In the 80s many countries put rules into place which forced the industry to filter/ treat their emissions. Technology gooood.
Some countries restrict their people's access to personal fire arms more than others. Statistics show that shootings are more likely, when everybody has a gun. Technology baaad.
In my opinion it is mostly about the common rules a society agrees on. Technology amplifies both ways and needs to be moderated when it is misused.
Fentanyl is a technology.
I think the real problem is the drive to monetize so much of the technology. For instance, product owners continually try to increase engagement in their stupid apps and continually move things around and add new widgets that people don’t want, or use, all while continuing to degrade the experience of the features that they do use.
Technology is not neutral, and philosophers have known this since the middle of the 20th century. See for example Heidegger, Ellul, Arendt.
Technology makes us relate to the world and others in a distorted way. Instead of speaking to you directly, and see your face and features, I relate to you through pure text... A whole lot of important factors disappear as I do. Compare this then to politics, earth, society, where technology have the same effect
Instead of speaking to you directly, and see your face and features, I relate to you through pure text... A whole lot of important factors disappear as I do.
Yes. That's an aspect to keep in mind.
I think distorted is a bit negative. Communication with filters, yes. I see advantages and disadvantages. It really depends on the case. It's technology-bound but not exclusive to the digital age - Letters existed before.
Advantages: asynchronity, time to think and reply. Use of different media. Less stressful because less information to process - there is a reason why video telephony isn't mainstream. Less bias, for all you know I could be Gregor Samsa - you don't see my gender, age, skin, clothing style. just my text. Disadvantages: misunderstandings can become more likely, since you dont know me. It's more time consuming to talk through an issue... and so on.
See for example Heidegger, Ellul, Arendt.
Would you recommend one specific article or book?
Good God you people are deep in the sauce. Just straight up ignoring the fact that tech enabled propaganda to be spammed in people's faces 24/7. It's so obviously a net drag on society at this point. But don't dare take away my dopamine rush.
I didn't find the article particularly insightful but I don't like your way of thinking about tech. Technology and society make each other together. Obviously, technology choices like mass transit vs cars shape our lives in ways that the pens example doesn't help us explain. Similarly, society shapes the way that we make technology. Technology is constrained by the rules of the physical world, but that is an underconstraint. The leftover space (i.e. the vast majority) is the process through which we embed social values into the technology. To return to the example of mass transit vs cars, these obviously have different embedded values within them, which then go on to shape the world that we make around them.
This way of thinking helps explain why computer technology specifically is so awful: Computers are shockingly general purpose in a way that has no parallel in physical products. This means that the underconstraining is more pronounced, so social values have an even more outsized say in how they get made. This is why every other software product is just the pure manifestation of capitalism in a way that a robotic arm could never be.
edit to add that this argument is adapted from Andrew Feenberg's "Transforming Technology"
I like the way you argument but I'm not able to grasp what you try to say entirely. English isn't my native language, this may play into it.
Technology is constrained by the rules of the physical world, but that is an underconstraint.
I. e this sentence.:) Would you rephrase it and give an additional example?
I kind of get the mass transit vs. cars example. Although I think both options have their advantages and disadvantages. It becomes very apparent to me when... Lets say, when you give everyone a car and send them all together into rush hour and transform our cities into something well suited for cars but not so much for people. But that doesn't make the wheel or the engine evil in itself.
Also: The society and and it's values affects technology which in turn affects the environment the society lives in. Yes, I get that when I think i.e. about the industrialisation in the 19th century.
I struggle with the idea that a tool (like a computer) is bad because is too general purpose. Society hence the people and their values define how the tool is used. Would you elaborate on that? I'd like to understand the idea.
I think I basically agree with you and the author here. People applying technology have a responsibility to apply it in ways that are constructive, not harmful. Technology is a force multiplier, in that it makes it easy to achieve goals, in a value neutral sense.
But way too many people are applying technology in evil ways, extracting value instead of creating it, making things worse rather than better. It's an epidemic. Tech can make things better, and theoretically it should, but lately, it's hard to say it has, on the net.
I think a clear distinction to make might be:
“Tech” as used in this sense is the industrial complex around mobile and web technologies dominated by a few players who might just be evil.
“Technology” is, of course, everything you mentioned and more. A rock that fits nicely in your hand becomes technology when used to crack a coconut.
It’s a weird linguistic murkiness, isn’t it?
The field of language, the meaning of words in different contexts... Communication in general, they wrote books over books about it...
Yes. Murky. :)
the article is talking about both, or perhaps conflates the two. QR code menus.
Or like the death ray!
(Futurama reference)
The original use of what we now think of as a "spoon" originally had nothing to do with food.
1000 years ago they would chain slaves neck to neck. They'd use the spoon to carve out everybodies eyes except the first guy in the line. Slaves don't need to see. They just need to carry heavy shit. The first slave can see. The rest just need to go where their neck drags them.
I say all this to agree with you. Technology isn't the source of corruption and evil. It is just a tool. Just like a spoon. I use my spoon to eat cereal. Others use the spoon to carve out peoples eyes. The spoon is not evil. The spoon is a tool.
Atomic bombs are also tools with no moral compass of their own.
Tech is a tool. It can be benefitting the oligarchs and restrictive, or benefitting society and open source.
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.
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.
For many things I completely agree.
That said, we just had our second kid, and neither set of grandparents live locally. That we can video chat with our family --- for free, essentially! --- is astonishing. And it's not a big deal, not something we plan, just, "hey let's say hi to Gramma and Gramps!"
When I was a kid, videoconferencing was exclusive to seriously high end offices. And when we wanted to make a long distance phone call, we'd sometimes plan it in advance and buy prepaid minutes (this was on a landline, mid 90s maybe). Now my mom can just chat with her friend "across the pond" whenever she wants, from the comfort of her couch, and for zero incremental cost.
I think technology that "feels like tech" is oftentimes a time sink and a waste. But the tech we take for granted? There's some pretty amazing stuff there.
for free, essentially!
Say that to the Facebook Portal: a fantastic product five years ago that is now having its features gutted because Meta couldn't figure out how to make money off of it.
Tech tends to goes through stages:
A need or idea is created. Usually by a small independent entity.
A proof of concept is developed and starts to gain ground.
Investors pour money into the concept to an extreme degree. Tech grows in functionality, matures and develops into a useful tool.
The the investors demand a return on the investment and the money dries up.
Company either goes bankrupt or their product goes to shit.
There's magic and then there's complexity in tech (at least this is how I think about it).
Video calling, pure magic, simple to use with major benefits.
Complex business management software that requires a degree to use? Complexity almost for complexity's sake to lock an organisation into a support contract.
Web stores? Usually magic, especially with refined payment processing and smooth ordering. Can verge into over complex coughAmazoncough.
Internal network administration (Active Directory) and cloud tech, often complexity for complexity's sake again.
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.
I like playing video games...
The dissatisfaction is in regards to the imperative that you use all forms of tech in all aspects of your life. It is with the fact that all tech is designed around making money, not improving life. If your video games were designed around bringing joy and entertainment, then you would probably like them even more, and get more benefit from them. Instead there are loot boxes and gambling in nearly all large games.
Luckily some games are still made for fun. And some gambling games were fun before they were monetized, and still are in spite of it.
I have never played loot box / gambling / gacha games. I will admit that I have given in and I do play games with DRMs, which are most games these days.
I agree that games shouldn't have those ant-user elements, but since I don't play them, why should I tell other people what they can and can't do?
Tech definitely is. Gate-keeping, stupid pricing, etc. done by few corporations and individual isn't.
Is it a shocker most people in tech are selfish, short sighted, and self-aggrandizing?
Some parts of life have gotten massively easier. The other day I called my pharmacy to delay my next prescription refill because I still have pills. I was able to do this entirely through voice interaction with an automated system. Huzzah. I get texts when my scrips are about to be filled or ready, and reminders if I don’t pick them up for a while. I can also see this info on demand in an app if I want. What’s not to like?
My entire medical group runs on an app now. I can make appointments with my doctor, see the documentation from prior visits, pay bills, see test results…
Oh but boo hoo this author had to download an app to order a drink. First world problems…
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.
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.
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.
Scenario1:
"Um, hi. Can I just order here inside? Thanks. I'm really hating the apps now. For sure: one medium cold-brew, please. Yes, thanks, to go. Okay; tap here? Excellent. Oh. Put 'guppy' on the cup. Thanks! [pause] Oh, perfect. Hey, thanks again for letting me skip the app. Those are so frustrating! I'm really starting to avoid any place that uses them, and I'm so grateful I can still come in. Have a great day!"
Scenario2:
"Um, hi. Can I just order here? No? Just the app? That's too bad: I'm really getting frustrated with the app and I'm starting to avoid places that need them. Nope, that's all I needed, sorry. Thanks anyway, and have a great day!"
I like this idea because
In all things, you don't wanna be That Guy, because you know servers don't need that shit. But, while the odds are slim of feedback getting up the chain of command, you're being clear (and probably more concise) as to how to get more of your business in case the feedback DOES go up.
I just take my brick phone out and say that I can't use their app on this. Although once went to the pub after work and it meant I didn't need to pay for any of my drinks which was nice.
because you know servers don't need that shit.
No. Dead wrong. It's precisely the frontline staff who need customer feedback, and if makes them uncomfortable then so much the better.
It's the rank and file's job to pass criticism of the service offering on in team meetings, culture surveys, etc. My job sucks this week because I have to do x and yet the customers all hate it. Staff will drive change to policy when it's their ears copping the response day-to-day.
'I couldn't possibly bother the floor person' is code for 'I am going to tolerate in silence any corporate policy no matter how obnoxious', and line management and the executive know it.
LOL, as a rank and file, corporate doesn't care. I pass along feedback, but even if they lose 1% of their business, corporate won't stop their bullshit.
I work in a coffee shop; I already feel sufficiently dehumanized by the amount of people who answer my "how are you today?" with "cappuccino to-go". I would hate to work in a café where you order via your phone.
Honestly? Cool that you are asking, but I just want a coffee, not a conversation.
Yes, I'm German, how could you tell?
I feel the same. Find it annoying when in the US the waitress introduces herself, asks where I'm form, etc. Do you work for a diner or the CIA? Just bring me a steak with fries, medium rare, please and thank you.
You can just answer "fine" and I'll be satisfied though, it's really easy to sus out who wants to chat up their barista and who just wants to go in, order, get out. I'm not seeking to force anyone into a conversation they don't want, I just want a faint acknowledgment of my humanity, you know?
Not everyone wants to socially interact. That's something to respect.
I tend to prioritize not-human services, as social interaction exhaust me.
When I used to work with customers I really didn't like when people starting talking about unnecessary staff. The less I had to interact the better for me.
I get that and totally respect it, and I never pursue further conversation unless I get a chatty vibe from the customer.
However it's insanely rude to ignore me to my face after I've just asked you a question. If someone answers "Fine. Cappuccino to-go." that's really all I'm asking for. I'm not simply an interface through which you get coffee, I'm a human person, and I think customer service staff deserve to be treated as such.
I'm tired of the people who are the ones that have taken tech to the direction it has gone in for a long while now. Making up problems that weren't ever there before that suddenly now need a stupid app or a feature to fix but adds in its own problems.
I'm tired of big tech deciding when we should upgrade because they deliberately create things that break, degrade and becomes obsolete far shorter than whatever should have.
I'm tired of unnecessary things like added fees for 'convenience'. I'm tired of things like fucking google flipping back accounts on me when I need to see a number to another account.
So much shit is that I'm tired about with tech. Tech is supposed to be exciting, easier, friendlier. Now it's just manipulated into a problem of its own, simply because of those who are behind it.
I'm tired of big tech deciding when we should upgrade because they deliberately create things that break, degrade and becomes obsolete far shorter than whatever should have.
I think about Apple quite a lot in this regard. Not because of planned obsolescence or anything so nefarious, but because they genuinely make some of the best consumer hardware you can buy, and because it's so good it costs a decent wedge. Then, five years later, when that good hardware is still as good as the day you bought it, they quietly drop OS support for it because they need you to buy another one.
And most people will smile and thank them for the trade-in discount they'll get to help them spend more money, while that older, still perfectly usable hardware is shipped off to a massive shredder to take it off the used market.
I use Macs, I understand this process very well. But I've also done my fair share of putting OCLP on older hardware in order to wring a few more years out of it, and of putting Linux on even older Macs because they still work perfectly well. I mean, I have a 2011 MacBook Pro that's running Linux Mint so well that you wouldn't have any idea that it's a 14 year old laptop.
The second best thing Apple are good at is convincing their customers that the equipment they own is old and knackered. And that's kinda sad.
Worst thing to happen to tech is ads.
People weren't willing to pay with money. Usually every tech product with ads has an "insert coin to remove" option. If you don't insert coin, advertisers will.
God, same. I'm to the point where I don't even want a phone at all anymore. I'm so tired of just... everything.
I don't want to read this article, because I know it's right, and it's depressing.
I'm tired of people saying "technology" when they mean an application of a narrow subfield of technology. Even worse is when they're not even talking about the tech at all, but instead the practices, leadership, or stock market performance of some corporation that happens to apply some technology in the course of its business.
I do share the sentiment in this article, though. There's way too much stuff that we don't need, often making our lives worse, being pushed at us in order to extract wealth or power.
Agree. I think a lot of tech just isn't directly visible to consumers in most cases. I'm specifically thinking of medical applications, robotics, manufacturing, etc. Some more visible applications would be transit (maglev trains are in trials now) and a number of similar things. There's also biotech stuff about which I know little.
Water treatment, thermal insulation, textile fabrication, pharmaceuticals, air filtration, construction techniques, signal processing... the list goes on.
The sick sad history of computer-aided collaboration:
https://www.quora.com/Who-invented-the-modern-computer-look-and-feel/answer/Harri-K-Hiltunen
Tech was ruined in the 90s when capitalistic influences (microsoft being the dominant force but far from the only one) propagandized the industry and eventually populace at large with the idea that competition in the industry is what drives innovation.
Granted, much of their work was already done for them thanks to western influence perpetuating this ideal for ages. But when the frameworks for open standards, interoperability, and collaborative development were being proposed and put into place they were shot down and/or actively sabotaged
As a result 40 years later we have this mess. A landscape filled with nightmare tech. Fragmentation everywhere, design heavily influenced by a small handful of sociopaths with no empathy and active disdain for users, the idea of open standards is something that requires government intervention (and still rarely occurs), interoperability is something that has to be hacked around and frequently breaks as a means to encourage purchasing a competing product.
What could have been. Tech designed for people’s needs rather than tech designed to extract income
Tech was ruined in the 90s
40 years later
Pick one. I'm 41 and was born in 1983.
First world problems: the article.
Tech could make our life easier, if only the fruits of increased efficiency would go towards us all instead of the few rich people at the top.
If only the goal of the tech firms was to make the world better while making enough money to achieve this, rather than their goal being to make as much shareholder value as possible while ekeing out improvements on a schedule that fits their need to maximise profits.
The overwhelming majority of software ever written is fucking terrible and causes more problems than it solves.
Since software is easily copiable and mutable, that small sliver of good software gets replicated all over the place and serves as a foundation for other software, both good -- and at the risk of repeating myself -- and mostly bad.
People would be better off considering new tech as the tool it is rather than seeing every piece of software as inherently better than the thing it replaces.
Tech doesn't make the world better. It's a tool that's been used to make rich people richer. Everyday people coming together for a greater cause makes the world better.
That is what naked apes they said about clothes
I remember Andrewism's take on Luddites dispelling a lot of common misconceptions (and results of propaganda, iirc) on the topic
Technology has started to make it easier and easier to be anti consumer. To maximise how much you can extract out of consumers.
It is making it easier to understand and control exactly how they use products and services. This allows you to structure your price and offering to give them the minimum amount they'll accept at the maximum price. Allows you to strip features out and offer them for extra. Allows you to hide things behind ongoing subscriptions. Allows you to better lock people into products and services, making it more difficult to switch/leave.
All of this was possible (and being done) before, but technology makes this so much easier/better.
Technologies often start out by making something easier for the consumer. But beyond the early stages, it's all about making the world better - for the corporations developing and selling products and services.
Technology and progress were at one time closer to synonymous but those definitions have forked widely. It's important to identify what is a development that brings value and pushes progress and what is a use of technology that punishes us, controls us, or simply makes life more complicated. The vast majority of technology now falls into these categories.
I mean, it can. US projects a lot of its influence from its technology dominance, but AI has the potential of turning that mountain of an advantage into a molehill, and the thing about AI that investors don't want to admit is that it reaches a performance ceiling, so investing more into it might be good for the short term, not so good for the long-term. Unfortunately, it's still going to savage through salaries and job availability - but this also affects the biggest economies more than it does the lesser ones. Crypto, AI, tech is at least helping the technological Silicon Valley hegemony shoot itself in the foot.
Why don't you live in a cave then & why are you even posting this ? Be the change you want to see bro/sis ?
Something, something, the industrial revolution and its consequences...
