> So it's not just me, an old man yelling at the cloud. The world is getting shittier.
This explains why Cory has been very irritated for a long time. If your outlook is world is objectively worse than 50 years ago, or even 20 years ago - then it makes sense why you're constantly upset at things.
"The arc of the technological universe is long, but it bends toward progress."
The "it's not just me" part is because he's citing a survey. He has been irritated for a long time because everybody (or at least a statistically significant sample) is irritated.
Yeah. A survey of other people who like Cory (I haven't checked this, but it's almost certainly true) are _also_getting_older_.
If the pollsters somehow stumbled on a pocket of people who don't age, this would be the most stupendous example of burring the lede I've ever encountered.
The National Customer Rage Study is a cross-sectional study. The organization (Customer Measurement & Consulting) picks a new sample each time. Has the proportion of older people in the US population grown so much as to explain the increase in customer complaints?
A lot of what we're seeing is yet again due to the largest generation in US history (the "boomers", so called because they were a population boom) progressing through their lives. Everything from the summer of love (when they discovered hormones) to the OMG we're old! vibecession.
I dont think you're using the term correctly. Charging money for product/service is not enshittification. If you insist on that, you're living in fantasy land.
How did you go from "charge a fee for premium features" -> features degrade over time?
Apple has been charging a ton of money for their products and AFAICT their products have been pretty good
You're right, I skipped a step/was unclear. Features will degrade over time for _non-subscribers_. They'll eventually wall it off so that you have to have a subscription. Then they'll start degrading the features for everyone (who has to be subscribed). Then they'll have a new tier and the process begins anew.
Start with a subsidized product and delight users -> step 1.
Prioritize the business by charging extra -> step 2.
Degrade what people get for their price and extract revenue at the expense of the users -> step 3.
> Features will degrade over time for _non-subscribers_.
I mean, duh? It isnt a gotcha. Do you expend resources in your life maintaining relationships / friendships with people that dont matter to you? Are you in touch with your high school best friend?
Poeple prioritize their limited resources, similarly companies prioritize their customers.
Your high school friend shouldnt say "baggazhipz has enshittified their relationship with me".
Textbook strawman. Build up an alternate fact, and then attack it mercilessly.
> A straw man argument is a common logical fallacy where someone distorts or exaggerates an opposing position to make it easier to attack. Instead of addressing the actual point, they refute a weaker, fabricated version of the argument (the "straw man") to create the illusion of having won the debate.
There's nothing AFAICT that says Google is considering any such thing.
The revisionism about Apple is fascinating. "Apple is sitting out AI", "Apple is smart to see through the hype"
This is the same company that got caught pants down by making iPhone 15 "built ground up for Apple Intelligence". They breathlessly touted their superiority, and when they failed to deliver, tucked their tail behind the legs and went to their rival / frenemy Google for their model.
So nope, Apple isnt sitting this out. Apple is scared, and very much so. You're seeing the valiant fight of a dying giant.
Why do you want something useful like this to be with a company? Isnt it better if everyone in the world benefitted from this?
reply