• 0 Posts
  • 71 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 13th, 2023

help-circle








  • I’m inclined to agree. I think the best path through would be to focus on laws that benefit multiple minor players that have a seat at the table.

    Antitrust laws in general are a good example. These function at the direct expense of big monopolies, but are exactly what companies need if they want in on what was monopolized. And in the case of breaking a monopoly down, the resulting “baby” companies given more power, growth opportunity, hiring opportunities (job growth) and money making potential than the parent. This can also spur economic growth for all the fat cats out there by creating many new investment and hiring potentials. Overall, if you can get past the monopoly itself (read: take the ball away from your billionaire of choice), everyone else involved stands to benefit.

    There may be other strategies, but I can’t think of any right now. I think the key is to tip the scale in favor of more favorable outcomes, then repeat that a few more times, achieving incremental progress along the way. Doctorow outlines the ideal end state for all this, but it’s up to everyone else to figure out how to get there.

    While I don’t like the idea of embracing capital to improve things, the whole system is currently run this way. Standing with other monied interests that are aligned with the same goal might be the only way to go.


  • Just yesterday, Mrs. Warp Core was trying to enroll with an online service. The self-service email confirmation link refused to function correctly in Firefox on a desktop operating system (Windows in this case). It worked flawlessly on Firefox+iOS. Said link also shuttled the user straight off to the phone app.

    I’ll add that nearly ever other aspect of their public facing web, including the online chat support, worked flawlessly everywhere I tried it. This all just reeked of hostile design.

    When asked about why this is, I simply said:

    The browser provides good security and choice for the user. Apps provide good security and control for the vendor.





  • Common language used to dismiss bad decisions like this:

    • We need to track and meet our metrics for the quarter
    • Engagement for $FEATURE is down, so we have to take measures to get people to take notice
    • It’s opt-in/opt-out, so it’s the right thing to do
    • It’s only a one time thing and then the system remembers1 what the user selected
    • Only new users are affected - our power users will put up with it
    • It’s just a minor inconvenience, really
    • It’s just a website

    1 - Oh, did you turn off cookies or clear your cache? Sorry about that.




  • It has been pretty depressing to me that the tech literate have been so easily lulled into accepting such things in the name of “cool toys” and “security” virtually everywhere in modern life besides the PC/laptop/server spaces.

    From my exposure to supporting said folks with PC related problems, its easy to see the reality here. Phones provide a streamlined experience with zero frills. They don’t want super flexible computing devices, they want appliances. More to the point, the level of care and maintenance needed to have a top-shelf PC experience is time and effort most people would rather not expend. Doing this right was inconvenient to begin with, and left the field wide open for anything that would be easier.



  • Think about it like a diamond-encrusted mouse.

    Oh good grief. Do they really think they can adopt the subscription-for-heated-seats model, and get people to use their high-end computer peripherals as some kind of flex? I just don’t see people holding their “Logitechtm Gamer PC Lease” over anyone else’s head.

    My optimism has me thinking that this CEO is deliberately tilting at windmills in order to appease shareholders, because Logitech has been around long enough to be steady-state (not growing much) at this point.


  • but here we are, back there.

    The upside is that if you’re ever prompted to install a thing to your browser to use a site’s features, it’s because the built-in sandbox is too restrictive for what they want. It’s an immediate red flag.

    I also view prompts to “use our (phone) app” the same way. I’m already seeing your site, in my browser, with ten different kinds of adblock and tampermonkey scripts running. I already have what I want, and I’m not letting you anywhere near my data plan.

    Clearly, it’s time for a “no means no” extension.