They'll also sue your neighbour if your plants spread seeds to their land.

This is why I only seed torrents

That's cool. Good thing I have a black light, and can modify the seeds the same way they do. Therefore, not the same seeds.

Edit: didn't make this clear enough, the idea is to lightly modify their seeds just enough to make it legal. If they want to be shitty, we can be shitty right back. Any rule they make for us they make exceptions for the rich. Therefore, with enough cleverness and a stubborn refusal to accept others bullshit(and a bit of spite) you can exploit their rules and bend them to your will.

Enshittification is the product of high-barriers to entry in markets, especially monopolies.

As it so happens, the entirety of Intellectual Property legislation purposefully and artificially creates monopolies where they would naturally never exist and give said monopolies to specific people, supposedly the creators of intellectual works and inventions, but in practice it's to companies.

So, unsurprisingly, it's in the domains were Intellectual Property dominates - were monopolies are not just common but actually the norm - that the most enshittification happens.

So yeah, Patents, anything to do with Music or Video distribution, Software and because of things like anti-circunvention legislation (which is supposed to block unautorized copy of copyrighted materials) in general any form of digital content since for-profit companies invariably place digital content under some form of access control exactly because they can use anti-circumvention legislation to block their customers from moving to better products and services without incurring significant inconvenience.

IMHO, tearing down Intellectual Property legislation (or at least have it include forced interoperability as well as make consumer data be owned by the actual consumers with company-bankrupting fines for abuse) would reverse most enshittification, at least in the digital world (were anti-circumvention legislation is especially bad in terms of destroying even the smallest element of a Free Market).

Indeed. IP / patents is clearly a source of issue in physical objects as well. But once you buy them seeds they stay « according to the initial specs ». They won’t suddenly grow another plant once you have them.

You might not be allowed to do anything you want but that’s another annex issue.

For anyone who is interested in returning to simple mp3 players, check out the Snowsky range by Fiio.

The Echo Mini and soon to be released Echo Nano are pretty great little pieces that inhabit the offline music (and not your phone) space.

Edit - and Bandcamp or Soulseek to fill the drives up :)

Self hosting as well. navidrome and an android app like symfonium and you can do anything.

Yeah but I’m not putting my turn table in my back pack to go fishing with ;-)

I'm happy with the updoots that I got. I'd be even happier if I see someone else use it in a comment thread.

With Elon Musk soon to be a trillionaire and maybe Zuckerberg and Bezos, too. Being a billionaire won't be the dream goal anymore.

Only if it is linked to an online service or update service. In the absence of that they need to hard bake their enshitification strategy upfront.

You know, I agree with him that the pre-enshittification era wasn't a time of better leadership, but I don't think he got the reason for the change right. I think what we call Late Stage Capitalism comes from a single source: corporations don't give a rat's ass any longer if they exist in ten years. They are willing to toss reputation and long-term prospects out the window because the only metric that matters is quarterly numbers.

It's a thing I noticed on the Internet. I wondered why so many sites become big and then shoot themselves in the foot. We are on Lemmy (well, I am on Piefed) now, many of us from enshittified Reddit. But Reddit was the savior from an enshittified Digg, which was the savior from an enshittified Slashdot, etc. It figures that each iteration knew they were going to die making the choice they made, but also knew the quarter would be spectacular.

That worries me, because it's much easier to destroy something than to build it. If you go and look, the Internet is slowing down. It isn't being innovated, despite the need to do so. Instead, the big players see something grow, and they use their massive resources to buy it and kill it.

That's why I love open source: what is being built has long term plans. The main way that open source projects get enshittified is when they close source innovation and then follow the same trajectory as the big companies.

Was there a "pre-enshittifcation era" or were we merely at the first stage of system-wide enshitification?

I think the point was if it was a person physically doing it to you, you wouldn't just sit there watching them do it.

And the other half genuinely think that their team of bought politicians are the good guys...

I don't think they were shitting on power windows, but rather the lack of option for a lower priced model without them. It wasn't too long ago that there were economy models without power windows available for certain cars.

That is a nice thought. But the government has never been "for" the people. And you can't reasonably expect people who are chosen by a popularity contest to be able to devise a way to provide that balance. It's not a required skill to get elected. And you can't expect the voters to know what real skills a polotician has. The spin and propaganda are just to effective at manipulating voter impressions. So it can't be the government...

So I will disagree on one point. If facebook stayed with just a few ads, that would not make value for the shareholders. Shareholders only make money if the stock price goes up, which requires people to buy it at the higher price. And if the company isn't growing double digits, buyers will go elsewhere. So the drive to produce shareholder value forces companies to chase the double digit growth or die. And shareholders want quick gains, so they can move on to the next company with double digit growth.

It's not the ceos who are the reason for all this. It's that all this causes boards to chose ceos that operate this way. People see that, and then aspire to do the same so they can be rich. This is why ceos spend so much time essentially marketing thier companies ideas. Thats how you get the stock price to go up. Buyers buy on the perception that a company is doing great things, or will. Reality doesn't often factor in like people think it does.

As for AI. They don't care about replacing humans. All they care about is a sales pitch that makes the stock price go up. If telling people that there software will replace humans does that, then that is what they will say. They don't let reality get in the way.

Stocks aren't necessarily a bad thing since they in theory represent abstract ownership of a thing. Perfectly fine when privately held, it becomes an increasingly problematic thing when. Traded on an open market though.

This is the race to the bottom I mentioned. If one country doesn't allow stock in their companies to be bought, the companies can't make as much money. So they don't form as often or move. Then that country goes into a recession. Overall, it is the lack of a world wide coordinated effort to prevent the incentives to mortgage the future for gains today.

stock are great for the rich who don't have to lift a finger to pay a broker to put 1 mil into a stock and let it get to 2 mil in a couple years. With zero labor involved.

It's tough, the companies can't change unless the people do. Meaning customers refusing to do business with companies that have bad customer service or refusing to buy stocks in such companies. But there will always be people who see that they can make money off of other people doing that. And it doesn't work if some people get rich bucking the trend.