Why all of a sudden tech companies are not being favorable to their users?
YouTube disallowing adblockers, Reddit charging for API usage, Twitter blocking non-registered users. These events happen almost at the same time. Is this one of the effects of the tech bubble burst?
Most of the aspects have already been covered but I would want to add one:
This was always the plan, it just wasn't as highly prioritised as growth.
I work as a developer at a big tech company. We (the company) had our roadmap and it was mostly about getting more users. The more users you have the day the economy turns - the better off you are (... If you manage to turn an profit).
So when the economy went to shit and we (and other tech companies) no longer can loan money for free to cover our running expenses - the priorities shift. Working towards attracting more users is only going to increase your costs at the point and you don't want to run out of money. So all roadmaps changed and cost saving efforts became the highest prio all of the sudden.
Gain a monopoly, get users addicted and reliant, then change the rules of the game and hope they stick with you. It's happening now because of the economy for sure, but it's not like it's surprising.
This was always the plan, to put a world in your hand...
And then squeeeeze it until the last drop of blood dripps out of it.
I think it's a consequence of higher interest rates drying up VC money, meaning that tech companies now have to actually be profitable, rather than just grow.
If the plan was grow now, profit later, then later has come
Nailed it, investors are demanding profit increases, it's not just interest rates (though they're the main reason) but also the corporate tax cuts in 2018 basically dumped a ton of profit onto corporations because they repatriated all their offshore cash they'd been hoarding.
That bump lasted 2 years, but the expectation of higher revenue is still there, it doesn't matter if you got lucky at slots last month, if you make your normal salary this month investors will be absolutely pissed.
This sounds too stupid to be real but I was working for one of the largest corporations in the world during this period and we were congratulated on 20% growth even though we did nothing. Of course we didn’t get an extra bonus or anything but they acted like we had an incredible year when we really just had an average year with a massive tax cut.
Then the next year, our goal was to grow at 20% again and when we missed it by 17%, no one got a bonus or raise.
This timeline is the stupid one.
This is also a great example of why higher interest rates aren't automatically a terrible thing. In general, it's probably a good sign for the economy that companies are expected to be profitable. Means resources are being used well. The limitless VC money kinda meant any dumb idea regardless of merit got funding.
any dumb idea regardless of merit got funding
That's still the case and high interest rates haven't really fixed that because they are still not high enough. Just look at how any company mentioning "AI" in their earnings call gets extra billions in market cap overnight without having a real product yet.
That rather assumes that it actually matters that VC money is being wasted.
After all it keeps the money in circulation and keeps people employed. They then get paid and will then buy useful things from companies that do make profit, so in the end it all works out. It's only bad for the investors, but that's always been the thing about investment, it's always been a risk, and it's never been guaranteed.
No. I don't mean to be rude but most of that message is wrong.
VC Money is very much not drying up. 2023 has seen record rounds in most markets. What is drying up is "VC Money for early stage startups with no revenue, no traction, and barely a functional idea", but even that is not new it has been going on since at least 2018. Remember that guy who raised 1.5M$ with an app that just let you say "Yo" to your contacts ? That was 10 years ago. Those times are dead and buried.
Then the link between VC markets health and interest rates is... contentious to say the least. VCs don't borrow money - they raise funds from family offices and individual investors, every 2 or 3 years. So every change to the financial landscape will have a progressive effect over 3 years, not a brutal one after a few months. Also you have to bear in mind that the people who bankroll VCs are looking for performance of at least 2X over 10 years. Interests would have to go up to 7% to even be in competition with VC investment. Of course there's a psychological aspect to investment so the effet is not ZERO but it's not as automatic as saying "interest go up => vc dry up".
Finally, the companies we are talking about are in vastly different situations and not necessarily looking for VC money. There is no explaining their behaviour with a single cause, what we're seeing is probably a cluster effect, because executives are like fish they always follow the movement of the other fish in their field.
Their monetization is so low (<2$/month/user, when the competition is 10 to 20 times higher) that they could bear to lose 50% of their userbase and still make bank with the remaining ones.
What's left unsaid here (but I'm sure you realize) is that these same users whose monetization is so low also provide most of the content and moderation on the site. When you spread out the value of that among the (human) userbase, the total value returned to Reddit by each human is higher.
Steve thought he was targeting the AI with this move, but in reality he has been charging his most engaged users. If he's upset that Apollo has turned a profit, the correct move was to acknowledge that one guy has done a better job than Reddit's team, not tell all the users that Apollo helped bring to Reddit that they were no longer welcome
Couldn't it be argued that it's a mistake from reddit to think of themselves as being comparable to platforms that make more money per user?
For example reddit and youtube are completely different in terms of the nature of the platform. Could attempting to monetize an average reddit user to the level of those using youtube might be a mistake? Keep in mind that reddit has much lower overhead for keeping the service running.
The mental image I'm going after is a country that exports mainly wheat arguing that its' exports should be valued the same as a country that produces complex electronics. The products are at a different realm of complexity. Commodities should be valued for what they are and not be confused with higly refined products.
I'm not so sure about Google nowadays. What started out as an everyday product killing, ended up as the first of many. They killed Stadia from one day to the other, and then started to basically sell and kill everything that is not massively profitable to the point they sold their domain distribution as well to Squarespace. That does not seem like something a massive monopoly with no regards to investor opinion does.
maybe inflation.
just because U don't see a price tag doesnt mean its not there.
if you cant see the product, then you are the product!
the state of wellbeing had never really been that great to start.
Part of it is the standard crisis of capitalism, the profit you get from doing the same thing always declines, so over time you have to push up revenue (increasing prices, forcing people to pay, showing more ads, gathering more data, etc) & push down costs (fire engineers, run on less hardware, etc)
Part of it is capitalisms natural tendency to create monopolies, and the lack of competition in a given field causing the company to then lose sight of what it's good at to compete in a bigger field.
Part is that interest rates mean loans are no longer cheap, so taking on debt to get customer, to at some point down the line make money, is a less viable plan. Twitter is a special case where the bad loans are because that was the original deal not interested rate related, and Musk is trying to pull all of the enshitification levers at the same time.
Part is that CEOs generally don't have a fucking clue about their products or what they are doing (it's a circuit job about who you know/blow, not what you know), so once one CEO starts firing/enshitifying, the rest just copy them so as to not be left out.
"Enshitify" is my new favorite word, right after "Polymascotfoamalate".
Capitalism is a system built on greed as a foundation to function. In a capitalist system, you must always continue to grow, expand, engulf, absorb, and acquire. This is why it is such a toxic and destructive system. Capitalism will always incentivize companies to get the most people possible to spend as much as possible on as little as possible, that's literally the core principle of maximizing profitability.
It's why enshittification keeps happening, the system isn't broken, it's working exactly how it's supposed to.
It's not pure greed though, if companies do not push down costs & push up revenues enough, they get replaced by those that do.
It is capitalism doing what it does "best", here's a clip from I'm A Virgo that explains it better than me: https://youtu.be/lpagmvYZKRc?t=84
There are niches where companies can hide out for a while, especially if they provide a service that needs local implementation, but social media isn't one of those niches, if you get outcompeted, your toast, no matter how big you peak, MySpace, Tumbler, Digg, Slashdot, etc, this is the monopolization effect of markets.
free money has dried up, now they need to monetise your habits.
Interest rates go up > VCs can't barrow free money and demand a return on investment > companies try to demonstrate profitability > enshitification
It's a process known as Enshittification.
Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.
The rest of the read is quite good.
No tech burst.
It's just a cold recession. No one is admitting it, including consumers who keep spending away savings.
But companies are aware of it enough they are tightening purses preparing for harder times ahead.
Of course, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If everyone makes their products worse chasing this quarter's dollar, and people leave, those companies are going to have a harder time.
Especially as it becomes easier and easier to compete against them at scale.
Just wait until new feature requests and bug reports for something like Lemmy can be handled within moments by AI at dirt cheap pricing.
A very interesting future awaits around the bend.
I find it the ad bubble is bursting so companies are increasing costs for api access and divert people into using their own apps (so they can't block ads and such)
Well, I hope the Fediverse works out. Otherwise I think were gonna have to go back to hand printing zines.
You joke, but Reddit did something to piss me off a few months before the current fuckery, and I decided to find an alt and there weren't really any, like I found Mastodon but that's more of a Twitter replacement, never encountered this site while searching. What I ended up doing was downloading a bunch of books and putting them on my phone, then putting the books app where my Apollo app used to be on my homescreen. Now, more often than not, when I go to scroll, I end up just opening a book. I've got a little over 40 on there, they keep my progress, even across devices, and they work when there's no signal so I no longer have to fear public toilets with shitty cell signal lol.
Yes! That's awesome. Come join us in !bookclub@lemmy.world to discuss books!
This is the only response required. I'm quickly becoming exhausted of reading everyone's epiphany on "enshittification" as if it's some natural eventuality. Yes the money must eventually come, but not always at the expense of platform quality. If anything the results we see from "enshittification" are due to the fact that most businesses fail eventually due to poor leadership.
Just to echo what you have already said, money today is simply more expensive than it used to be. We even see the impacts of macro monetary decisions on households.
Buying a house or a car on loan is far more expensive than it would have been a year and half ago. A $500,000 house in 2021 would cost $2,000 a month at 2.75% interest and 20% down. Today same that payment is $2,800 or 40% more expensive at 7.75% interest.
Modern companies live on revolving debt, so if their suddenly gets 40% more expensive and that same amount of money is also less valuable at the same time (inflation), then they need to make up the difference somehow.
Corporations are trying to find the balance between squeezing more revenue to pay their ever increasing debt bills while also not destroying the environment that attracted the users (their products) in the first place. Twitter and Reddit are just going about it horrifically because of poor business leadership and decision making. Netflix's approach appears to be sustainable, and there is no doubt that YouTube will be fine in the long run.
This is not meant to be apologetic to the decisions made by Twitter and Reddit. They've made their bed through their own horrible decisions, and now they've got to sleep in it.
I remember a video, I think from ColdFusion, explaining how the economy has been working on debt on top of debt since the 2008 crisis. The whole idea of "grow first, profit never later" is only possible thanks to endlessly rolling debts. A bubble begging to burst
And the irony is that the same motherfuckers responsible for that problem will be responsible for this next one AND they'll still stay rich, while we slave away having to deal with "economists" complaining that we want to own houses.
Couple this with the idea that Elon is proving you can do something drastically unpopular to increase profit, and most users still won't abandon the platform. Tech companies, traditionally, move quickly off of FOMO to make a profit. Elon has brazenly validated many choices that other companies have generally considered risky up until his point.
I would expect this to get even worse now that spez has doubled down. Many people talk about how Elon and spez are ruining their platforms, but at least for now, they have seemingly gotten away with it. Some users have migrated to other platforms, but many have stuck around.
Hit the nail on the head. Elon and spez don't need to keep anywhere close to all their users for this to be a success. From a business perspective, they could lose a quarter of their users and still come out stronger if it means they've monetized the rest. Then add in the additional bonus of getting rid of all your ideological, principled troublemakers, leaving you with a platform full of high quality, addicted users that are easy to take advantage of. I don't like it, but it really is a sensible strategy from a monetization perspective.
Very interesting, thanks!
Any chance you know of any papers, ideally academic, that go into this, for further reading?
Because the days of just shoveling money into various silicon valley projects in the hope that maybe they'll turn a profit eventually is over. Big investment firms now want an actual return from their investment, and because of that, tech companies are desperately trying whatever they can to turn a profit from these massive services that are also very expensive to run. That usually comes in the form of changes that makes things harder for the users, but is significantly more profitable for the companies that run them.
For some more context, this is probably tied into at least two things. One is that the bubble was starting to be recognized for what it was. The other is that interest rates became positive again, so the bar for a good investment suddenly went from "I'll be happy if I get my money back" to "I want to be paid back double within 20 years".
I'm just waiting for the ads bubble to explore. There is very little real ROI. As a user, my eyes and mind are well training to avoid seeing any ad that traverses the adblocker, I never clic on any PROMOTED content nor on any link of the ad-top results. Always REJECT cookies I've the option. The advertising companies pay on what they believe I'm seeing, but on what I really see (and care). Just waiting for the day they realize and stop wasting money and disturbance.
Yeah, it's not just the current state that's the problem.
If these companies didn't spend 20 years not worrying about making a profit, they'd have had sustainable growth and be able to stand on their own long ago.
At this point no one could turn them around, it's too late.
And it's not just the lack of big money. The entire startup business model is the main investors immediately selling very small chunks to normal people. With the whole economy in the shitter, the big investors after an IPO are going to have to hold for a while before they can sell without nosediving the price.
I disagree. The valuations might be lower but tech is still where it's at and it's the only field getting exponentially better.
We have reached the stage where the snakes have grown large enough that they must prey on their own tails, for there is nothing left to eat.
Companies expect infinite profit growth
I always found this particularly odd. Is it greed, or some sort of business culture that is ingrained?
Short answer : Enshittification.
Long and brilliant explanation here : https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/
This concept is also why I’m so hopeful for federated software. The federated model means that there’s no single instance that holds all the power. Many of these instances are run by admins of their own kindness and initiative. And at worst, if any instance were to start being “enshittified,” people could easily move to another instance and continue participating in the greater network.
Between all of what we’ve seen unfold in the last few months, and even weeks, on Twitter and Reddit, it’s safe to say that “enshittification” could be reaching critical mass. That’s why I came here, after all, and I’m looking forward to seeing this community simply persist here on the web.
My fear is that even if you're correct, as the internet monoliths that have been built one the past decade fall to federated software, we will lose forever an unbeatable amount of arts and culture that has been stockpiled in these corporate spaces. Think of all the great educational YouTubers whose videos won't be able to be passed on to whatever the next thing is if YouTube collapses.
Jesus. It's articles like this that make me both be thankful for Doctorow and his ability to put tech shit in terms is non-techies can understand.
I find it fitting that an article on enshitification is so hard to read because of enshitification on the site.
Original on Cory Doctorow's own site here
When billionaire fascists start being held to account, they lash out.
I see this dumb shit made it over from reddit.
There are a lot of reasons for this general trend, but let me add my two cents to make a case for the sudden influx of user-opposed changes:
I don't have a source for this, but I remember that Linus spoke about this on the LTT WAN-Show. Basically, abunch of big silicon valley investors are pulling out of all of the big platforms, therefore leaving them with a huge hole in their profitability. This means, that right now a lot of them are scrambling to scrape together more money over time, so all of those platforms are sustainable.
Obviously this has to observed in conjunction with all of those are trends that are already mentioned by other comments, but this gives more basis as to why now, and why to this extent.
If someone else knows what I'm talking about please add quotes and sources because I don't like the good old 'dude trust me' guarantee one bit.
Note: Sources not all quite unbiased. Take a grain of salt.
They forget the users are their base, not their employees, or are bought by idiot billionaires who think they can turn the platform I to another money printer (or tax write-off)
Spez in particular saw Twitter and thought that would be a great idea.
I don't think he understands he's about to be CEO of Tumblr 2.0
Or famously digg
Because users are not the customer but the product for others. And with network effects meaning there's less competition (ie no place to go to), then they no longer have to attempt to appease the product and can focus on appeasing customers.
Because usually the greed, money and power corrupts, no matter how good you are in the beginning.
Money is tighter since the inflation affects VC and stupid money flowing in. Stock prices are not going up, people have no money to play with (see the death of NFTs at the same time, the definition of a stupid investment).
Oh you thought the end goal was to make a good website. Hahaha.
Not really "all of a sudden", this has been a long process. The often repeated enshittification thing is fully valid. The short version is:
Google, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter are the more obvious culprits, but every big tech company does something similar, one way or another, even hardware companies like Intel or Nvidia
nVidia was very popular as the scrappy upstart during the Riva128 and TNT/TNT2 Ultra days. Their popularity with users was very high at the time. Enshittification really got started with them during the early Geforce days and just spiraled around Geforce 3. When they got their asses spanked by ATI with the R300 series they had to de-shittify for a brief time.
https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/
Enshitifacation. Twitter onlyy turned a profit once, YouTube is about 20% of global bandwidth and has turned a profit. companies don't just want money they want the amount of money to always increase. So they turn to ever more exploitation to try to get it.
Thanks for the link. That was a really good read. Even better on Doctorow's own site, I think, because of all the extra links he provides.
Just wait till you have to pay per email. You're not still using Gmail are you?
Imagine being a tech company and using a stat like the number of emails received daily to justify pushing human users away from the product...
That's what I see with all these companies.
They see a huge user base by numbers but can't recognize that it's 99% boots and spam, thinking that the 1% real users are going to pay to interact with bot spam
It's not anything new and nothing "all of a sudden", unfortunately. Facebook, Tumbler, Google - all done stuff like that before. Even for Reddit this is not the first protest blackout and not the first time they treat users and mods like garbage.
It simply is now happening to the apps and services you (and I) use daily, so it hits closer home.
All modern stairs are built on the same terrible foundation: Attract users, no matter how much money you lose. Once you feel strong, introduce fees, ads, hike the prices and try to regulate years of financial loss.
Happened like clockwork, and companies going public are a clear sign it's just around the corner. (Kind of like any free mobile app will ask you for a 5 star review, just before introducing monetization schemes)
All modern stairs are built on the same terrible foundation: Attract users, no matter how much money you lose.
I have sustainable stairs at home which have plateaued at two users. Not all stairs.
Lol startups Leaving the error where it is. Editing still messy for me on Lemmy.
The 'trust thermocline' occurs when an organization repeatedly takes their customers for granted, and they reach a critical point of 'no trust return' and just leave. Essentially, if you gradually provide less quality while charging more money, you erode trust- and if you lose trust, you don't actually ever get it back. See: Twitter. And possibly now Reddit. Great term, I love it even, but I hate that the lesson these people are learning isn't 'hey maybe we should stop pissing people off without good reason' and is instead is "this is acceptable risk and we should continue playing chicken with dissatisfied users to make our shareholders happy."
Reddit only started hosting images and videos a couple years ago. That alone would massively add to costs. It's self inflicted and seems it was planned in an effort to keep people on the platform instead of linking to imgur to view the picture.
They brought the added overhead on themselves
well, they hired thousands of devs in the last few years, only to direct their efforts to self-hosting videos, chat features, customizable snoo avatars you can sell NFTs for, etc. (you know, things people wanted)
so I can understand the loss potentially growing in recent years, given what they've been spending on
Red Hat fell for this same trick too, the new enterprise pricing is unacceptable.
Their cash overlords want returns on their investments.
They haven't yet realized that a platform dependent on user created content and user run moderation, is infinitely replaceable. See Fark and Digg.
Reddit and Twitter and just the latest to learn the lesson. Without your users, you may as well be MySpace.
They've reached such an economic power that now they just want to be as profitable as possible, crushing any kind of competition of popular pro-user participation while profiting over our data and content
WE, the users, made them able to do so, giving them economic and sometime even geopolitical power. But WE still determine whether they can exist or not man, we still have the power to bring them down. It's time to take back what's ours!
Capitalism.
Capitalism is like cutting off your wings because you believe the reduced weight will make you fly higher.
Venture capital has shifted very quickly from companies HOSTING content to companies SCRAPING content (LLM’s). This means renting compute is now very expensive and moving into the hands of ‘AI’ companies. It’s like trying to fly a plane while monkeys are tearing the wings of.
That plus interest rates are going up. For twenty years VC's has near limitless cheap loans, now they've got to be marginally more careful than before and the companies which grew large but only ever broke even (if that) now need to pivot to profitability to justify all the debt they took on. Would not be surprised if Uber and Lyft start really hiking rates soon.
I think most taxi companies have adapted, so they are pretty competitive now.
YouTube is blocking adblockers? News to me
they are "testing" it. But yeah it's all over tech news right now.
I hope it goes the same way as the time they “tested” playing like 10 super short ads before the video. That and this are both plain awful sigh
Cheap/free money has dried up.
That and market share. Between 2007 and now, a website could reliably grow as new people got connected to the internet and as internet usage naturally grew. Up till recently, a large proportion of people either didn't use the internet at all, or had the internet, but didn't use much. Prior to 2020 I knew lots of friends and family who simply did not own a home computer or maybe had like one laptop for the whole family (and a bunch of phones).
During that era, the attention was all on getting new users in the door. Make a good, cheap/free product, and people will come, if you make the best site, people will find you.
But NOW, most people already are using the internet like 14 hours a day and have become full netizens and companies are already gigantic monopolies (Youtube does't have a viable competitor, for example). If companies want to keep growing, they can't rely on new blood, they need to pivot to harvesting more from the people they already have.
The biggest problem is that average people are used to the tech big companies provide, and lazy so that they won't move to overall better alternatives. This means the companies don't care about consequences of their actions, because there is NONE. Looking at it from the company's perspective, why not make more money from people that won't leave the site anyways?
Which is bad for society, but necessarily bad from a community stand point. Reddit has only gotten worse the more popular it had gotten. Starting over again in the next platform, maybe it could be better (without the monetization aspect). But someone has to cough up the dough for the servers. Non profit funding is happening; we'll have to wait and see if that is enough.
It’s called Enshittifiction
This
They were like this before also, but you're right: now they're much more overt and like they're pushed or hurried by something... And that something is the prospect of recession. They're not publicly announcing it, but their liquid assets are running low and they hit the ceiling for growth. YouTube is trying to maximize their exposure and revenue for ads by cracking down on adblockers; Twitter and Musk doing the dumbest decision just for money, the last one for the rate limitation being connected with not paying the bills to Google Cloud; Reddit introducing 3rd party API usage fees for, maybe, the same reason... They ran out of "smart" and covert solutions to milk their product, partners and clients of money and they would rather go down in greed. And they won't even be directly responsible due to those golden parachutes
I think part of it has been watching Twitter just completely abandon any attempts at treating users and developers well, and seeing that people are still active there. Reddit sees Twitter completely fuck over third party devs, and realizes they can do the same and weather the storm, and have it all work out well enough for them.
It's more like you now notice this because it have visible effects, but it's been going on for years. Restricting content, abusive rules and stupid changes have been the norm, all toward a centrally controlled experience geared toward generating internal profits on the back of users and content creators.
It's also why some prominent content creator started their own platforms, too.
It's just that now it reaches "intolerable" level for most end-users.
Others have basically captured it, but my read is a massive change in the overall risk profile held by venture capital firms. The time of reckoning has come, and it’s time for everyone’s (or at least VCs’) favourite three letters: ARR (Annual Recurring Revenue).
The last twenty years, we’ve seen this sort of spray-and-pray model, where 99 bad investments could be offset by 1 “unicorn”. The risk appetite seems to have shifted largely because 1.) there’s a higher volume of early stage concepts (so there’s more bad ideas), and 2.) there’s either fewer unicorns, or the unicorns that mature are ultimately less valuable.
Crunchbase put out a good analysis of the current trend of global venture dollar flow:
The Party’s Still Over: The VC Downturn In 6 Charts
You can read news from various outlets - some say it’s a post-pandemic correction. Some say it’s because labour is too expensive. But the bottom line is that VCs aren’t willing to spend money on “users-in-lieu-of-revenue” like they once were, and I honestly don’t blame them. There were a lot of really, egregiously stupid ideas coming out of SV, and their wax wings melted. sad_trombone.mp4
Adam Kotsko summed this entire phenomena up nicely:
Great explanation. The days of the "web 2.0" fantasy dream are officially over, investors needed their money back at a certain point and that point is now.
I think you really hit the nail on the head.
Crudely it can be summarised as a change from investors throwing money at tech in the hope of buying a share of future profits to wanting to see those profits. That means business models have to now actually deliver and a lot of then just don't - twitter, reddit, Gfycat - they're all part of the same phenomenon. Big revenues is meaningless without profit. While they may have value to the users, it seems the advertising funded models and data harvesting models just don't deliver profit for these kinds of services.
So they desperately try to adjust the models to maximise income and reduce cost. Enshittification ensues.
It always boils down to corporate greed unfortunately
Because investors are tired of the model where they dump a shit load of cash into something that has no good path for monetization. So they’re forcing them all to make money which hurts users.
Yup. You can't monetize something whose value is determined by the whims of the people who use it. There are a million websites streaming porn that do a better job of monetizing content than YouTube.
How did the "investors" think this business model was going to work, again? "Let's get millions of people to donate their time and content . . . pay them pennies in return, monetize all their content for ourselves and here's the good part . expect them to PAY for the privilege of accessing it?"
This worked when there was basically no interest on money that was lent from banks. But now when the interest is on the uprise. Well, naturally investors and banks pull the plug.
To be fair. I'm quite surprised that the plug wasn't pulled several years ago. Twitter has almost never being in the black, always in the red. Reddit has never publicly showed it's numbers, not yet. But would not surprise me if it was red numbers every year.
All of a sudden?
My dear, sweet summer child.
english is not my first language, maybe I should've used a different phrase but my context is recent events
You used the phrase correctly, and your English is great!
The above commenter was rudely stating that your observation is not correct as it's has always been this way.
Tech companies were only favorable to their users during the corporate Web 2.0 genesis when these companies had to lure educated users in with extremely convenient free services, but they always did and continue to do so under terms of service that are intentionally made as hard to read walls of legalese bullshit, so they always click accept and hand them power by moving there.
These companies usually are either publicly traded or aspire to be publicly traded, and are backed by venture capital loaned to them by banks and investors.
Then during the late 2000s and early 2010s these corporations gobbled up web traffic by having all the valuable information and communities behind their walls. This drove their operating costs up a lot but it was no problem, since the zero interest rate policy was in effect so these now-megacorps had basically interest-free loans to get infinite money to finance the platform. However they realized around the mid 2010s that they controlled the vast majority of the web so they realized they could be as greedy as they wanted since no one is going to ever step up to them (YouTube is a shining example of this) and ever since the mid-late 2010s they started nerfing and crippling the user experience in order to please their investors and ad networks. This process was extremely slow initially to minimize the backlash. They applied the boiling frog strategy and it worked.
By the early 2020s this was in full effect: websites do not respect your privacy and try to shove trackers and ads whenever and wherever they legally can, search engines are manipulated to put sponsored and SEO spam links first rather than useful answers, sites are implementing login walls to make sure the valuable content they hold hostage can only be accessed once they have the data of users, discourse is being controlled and micromanaged by corporations with automated censorship, mystery echo chamber algorithms, shadowbans and wordlists, news sites have article limits and paywalls now. It got so bad that it's already harming society as a whole because it's causing polarization and these platforms now have enough power to theoretically manipulate elections in some really bad cases.
This is a process known as enshittification: start great then become shit and die. Now that the zero interest rate policy is over, and interest rates started climbing up it means silicon valley free money is over so they can no longer afford to be boiling frogs, they are turning up the heat to 11 and just roasting the frog alive. In other words, the enshittification cycle is becoming exponentially faster and it's only going to get worse for the corporate web and its users. The only solution is returning to decentralized technologies like Web 1.0 used to be, but it's extremely hard since free as in you pay with your data services are addictive like crack cocaine.
I am starting to miss the echo chamber of YouTube. I am a fairly leftwing atheist in a solid blue state that ranks near last in religious observance. And yet roughly a quarter of the suggested videos/ads I get are for things like Epoch Times, Prager U, HeGetsUs, PJ Media.
Alright so the only way I am clicking on that stuff is by accident. From the advertisement point of view this is worse than selling iceboxes to Inuit, this is like trying to sell ribeye steaks to vegans with no money.
Which makes you wonder what the future holds. Say you are Epoch Times and you find out the YouTube is pushing your product on people who actively don't want to buy it how much longer are you going to pay Alphabet for a failed advertising campaign?
There's also a political agenda at play. The Wall Street madman caste finds left wing popular movements to be obnoxious, as they undermine their business model and cost them money.
Note how Reddit's admins would turn a blind eye to Nazi subreddits and shit like r/The_Donald for years, until the entire planet screamed at Reddit to exercise some basic asshole control.
But when people started talking about punching Nazis, the banhammer came out immediately. Gotta love Reddit's totally unbiased policies...
When left wing groups get big enough to get things done, Wall Street pulls strings and then you see bans, shadowbans, biased policies & enforcement against activist groups and marginalized groups (LGBT groups getting NSFW'd out of existence), trolling & astroturfing campaigns, mass propaganda, abuse of user data (Cambridge Analytica), ratting activists out to authoritarian governments, nerfing community moderation and letting Nazis go to town while yawning when users complain, while at the same time, anyone left-wing gets instabanned for jaywalking...
It's either that, or these specific groups are opening up their parameters and trying to reach/convert outside their base. Which sounds about right for religious groups.
the problem is businesses r built on the concept of infinite growth, profit isn't the thing that determines success, it's the constant increase in profit, now things r quickly hitting the limit and they're desperate to find any way to keep the number going up
I'd say because it's in the air. Obviously companies watch each other. Like the layoffs in January. The initial wave was the companies that needed to do it and had been planning it for awhile. Then when there was blood in the water everyone was doing it because then they aren't big mean company, they are just another company doing layoffs right now. Lost in the crowd. It's already come out some companies did it purely because big companies like Twitter and Google did it.
But we are seeing a big increase in anti-consumer moves because there seems to be no backlash. Like there's the vocal minority, but it seems by and large a huge amount of the customers for these tech companies are unwilling to move away.
Every time Twitter does something some move off Twitter, and they get such growth! But then eventually stuff like Mastadon's activity has a noticeable decline over time and Twitter carries on. Some people go back, some quit Twitter entirely. But these are fractions of a percentage probably. They still have the biggest celebrities and a crap ton of users.
Netflix just cracked down on password sharing, in a move that people were calling foolish. The outcry was everywhere and anytime Netflix was mentioned was 20 comments saying they cancelled that day. But subscriptions are up, Netflix won.
YouTube has been pushing more and more ads on users, there isn't as big as a direct backlash. Like there was more outcry on removing the dislike button. Which...no one cares now lol. But YouTube pushing's more ads, and they don't seem to be loosing money for it. I'm sure they are trying to find the 'breaking point' for customers. But either people really are willing to put up with 2 30second unskippable ads every 5 minutes or premuim subscriptions are skyrocketing as they ruin the free experience.
WB killed a ton of shows outright, basically burned a bunch of media and shuttered a ton of HBO Max's staff. People upset... Twitter all a buzz. Now it's back to HBO is the best streaming service (Which it is lol)
Like it just keeps going. I think it's just a combination of companies making terrible blunders steal the spotlight from each other and society as a whole has a 3 day memory. The Reddit protests are already cold news because Twitter just DDOS'd itself. People who saw all this with Reddit and call it disgusting moves by the company and the unspoken bond is broken, always end their diatribe with something like "Well I'll just use old.Reddit with an ad blocker" like they are winning when they still provide Reddit with their usage.
People like us who walk away and move to spots like this are the minority of a minority. It's up in the air how many will stay and how many will slowly forget their outrage at Reddit and go back.
Agreed. These companies learned that internet outrage is generally indicative of nothing actionable.
People! What a bunch of bastards!
It's because the 2024 election is coming up.
They need money for their greedy venture capitalists.
AI training and data mining. The value of data has surpassed the value of oil long ago. The world's most valuable resource is no longer oil.
Oil companies have assets and cash in the trillions it's not even funny. Even openAI who has the most state of the art AI systems on the planet right now is worth at best a billion, and is getting heavily subsidized by Microsoft. AI companies will probably get larger in the future, but the modern world depends on oil for literally everything including the making and the shipments of parts used to run AI shit. You seem to be grossly overestimating how much data is worth and grossly underestimating the power and money oil cartels wield.
There's a reason big tech companies are worth hundreds of billions of dollars yet most of their users have not paid a dime. So yes, data is valuable.
Data is very valuable. Google shows advertisements like they're listening to people's conversations, except they aren't. Their data profiles and predictions are so good they know what you want to buy before you even know you want to buy it.
Search the Cambridge Analytica scandal.. I am not grossly over estimating anything.
As discussed here:
Honestly they do it so consistently that i’m starting to wonder if they have a choice.
A common way to do things for tech startups is that they get venture capital funds, use them to run the business at a loss hoping to acquire market dominance, and then use market dominance to turn a profit. I think a lot of tech startups that we know are currently in phase 2, meaning they’ve thrown money out the window for years and are now trying to recoup their investments.
Also, Reddit wants to go public and Twitter already is. This is relevant because investors are animals, all they see is short-term profit, and they use their voting power to make the company behave that way.
There’s a common thread between both my theories: it’s shareholder capitalism. I say this as a lifelong shareholder myself, shareholders ruin everything.
If interest rates are high, I'm sure they're hard up for capital. The free money they've grown to depend on is drying up and they need to make money themselves asap.
Yup, tech bro culture is wasting someone's else money to play with computers. No money, no game time for baby. Silicon Valley is in a panic because the infinite spout of money suddenly stopped, and there's a line of pissed people asking for their money back. They promised the world, now it's time to deliver and turns out they have nothing of value.
Everyone's rushing to implement/improve AI. AI needs a ton of data, Reddit/Twitter are good available sources. Reddit/Twitter would prefer to sell this data as opposed to having it gathered from under them by bots, for free.
I think that's why Twitter and Reddit are rushing to restrict access (directly or through the API).
Youtube are just aggressively serving you ads, and limiting ways for you to circumvent ads. I think that's just what they do as they have the market sewn up
