First world problems: the article.
I'm Tired of Pretending Tech is Making the World Better
Submitted 22 hours ago by juergen@feddit.org to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.joanwestenberg.com/im-tired-of-pretending-tech-is-making-the-world-better/
Comments
Halosheep@lemm.ee 46 minutes ago
CriticalMiss@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
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
OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
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
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
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.
andros_rex@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
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.
Hominine@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
…always with the verification cans.
reksas@sopuli.xyz 6 hours ago
tech is not the problem, corporations are.
AlienContact2049@lemmy.ca 5 hours ago
Agree. It’s not the tech it’s how it’s used and how business owners drive the product development and timelines.
Tja@programming.dev 7 hours ago
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.
satans_methpipe@lemmy.world 11 minutes ago
lunch pause
car brakes automatically if I’m distracted
These two lines paint a very sad picture.
mPony@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
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”.
Ledivin@lemmy.world 13 minutes ago
…but just like you chided the person you replied to, none of that is true or real. The restaurant that forces you to use their app doesn’t exist, and it’s not the only restaurant in town. None of that is even because of technology, it’s because of capitalism.
Tja@programming.dev 7 hours ago
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.
endeavor@sopuli.xyz 7 hours ago
I agree. Tech is like fire, handle it responsibly.
Technus@lemmy.zip 22 hours ago
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.
multiplewolves@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
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.
Krelis_@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
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.
fan0m@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Boy do I have a story for you.
I tried to order a quesadilla from chipotle. A 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.
Technus@lemmy.zip 17 hours ago
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.
frezik@midwest.social 3 hours ago
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.
NotLemming@lemm.ee 4 hours ago
I watched a documentary about the Unabomber and had the same thought
Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 10 hours ago
Tech =/= megacorps
That’s like saying food doesn’t make the world better where you mean megacorps producing hunger & poverty.
NostraDavid@programming.dev 10 hours ago
I dont know… This Linux thing is pretty great, IMO.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 6 hours ago
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.
hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 22 hours ago
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.
CameronDev@programming.dev 22 hours 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.
Dimmer@leminal.space 20 hours ago
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.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Which changes rules, but not the resulting balance or lack thereof.
hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
Yep.
JollyG@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
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 the. 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.
hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 19 hours ago
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.
ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Fentanyl is a technology.
ghostrider2112@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
I think the real problem is the drive to monetize so much of the technology. For instance, product owners continually 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 did use.
Flagstaff@programming.dev 19 hours ago
It goes both ways: look at how much Lemmy usage has grown, and Lemmy’s existence is due to technology. We can protest with our dollars and time by leaving such products behind. Greed is independent of tech itself.
metaldream@sopuli.xyz 7 hours ago
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.
NewAccountEachYear@discuss.online 7 hours ago
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
theluddite@lemmy.ml 22 hours ago
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.
hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
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.
meyotch@slrpnk.net 18 hours ago
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?
hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
The field of language, the meaning of words in different contexts… Communication in general, they wrote books over books about it…
Yes. Murky. :)
jsomae@lemmy.ml 18 hours ago
the article is talking about both, or perhaps conflates the two. QR code menus.
Dagwood222@lemm.ee 21 hours ago
Atomic bombs are also tools with no moral compass of their own.
nickhammes@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
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.
lobut@lemmy.ca 17 hours ago
Or like the death ray!
(Futurama reference)
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
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.
hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
Never heard of this spoon invention story. I have doubts.:) I’m almost certain that eyes have been carved out by means of spoon. War, civil unrest and suppression of weaker minorities show that we have it in us.
leadore@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
As someone who grew up before the negative effects of computer/internet technology, and 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.
aesthelete@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
It didn’t have to be this way; in a different kind of society it could have been a boon to everyone.
Please hold onto 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 software shittier for the sake of the shareholders.
We have to imagine better choices. We have to imagine that we can change the course of things.
KeenFlame@feddit.nu 11 hours ago
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
leadore@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Well said.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 hours ago
Thanks Adam Smith…
Strider@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
I’m tired of pretending companies are making the world better.
See: The corporation The new corporation
LordCrom@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
“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.
apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Yep, technofeudalism is here.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 12 hours ago
Yet more benefits to cycling then. Just lock it to any reasonably sturdy object.
OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 16 hours ago
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.
T156@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Neither a phone nor website would work if your phone battery is flat. The meter should at least have a way for someone to park their car if they don’t have a functioning phone, or internet access, even before the hellscape of needing a separate app for everything.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 hours ago
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.
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.
Telodzrum@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
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.
Zorque@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
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.
metaldream@sopuli.xyz 6 hours ago
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.
qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 20 hours ago
For many things I completely agree.
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 call, we’d sometimes plan it in advance and buy prepaid minutes (this is 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.
ch00f@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
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.
The_v@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
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 poor 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.
lordbritishbusiness@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
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.
htrayl@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Tech has made things more efficient - the rewards of such are simply being funneled from the average person to the wealthy.
Telodzrum@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
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.
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
I’m tired of everybody wanting to see everything in binary good/bad terms.
barryamelton@lemmy.ml 19 hours ago
Tech is a tool. It can be benefitting the oligarchs and restrictive, or benefitting society and open source.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 hours ago
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.
Litebit@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
That is what naked apes they said about clothes
shortrounddev@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
The internet peaked in utility around 2004. Most, if not all, developments since then have only made things worse
jsomae@lemmy.ml 11 hours ago
I like playing video games…
cley_faye@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Tech definitely is. Gate-keeping, stupid pricing, etc. done by few corporations and individual isn’t.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 17 hours ago
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
- you’re affirming the target behaviour
- you’re getting a coffee and going
- you’re being chipper so they don’t feed off your grumpy face
- you’re providing feedback without being too much ‘that guy’, I hope, to the serving staff.
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.
Tehdastehdas@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
I am once again linking the sick sad history of computer-aided collaboration:
Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 22 hours ago
I don’t want to read this article, because I know it’s right, and it’s depressing.
Evkob@lemmy.ca 16 hours ago
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.
Eezyville@sh.itjust.works 19 hours ago
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.
demizerone@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Worst thing to happen to tech is ads.
MITM0@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Why don’t you live in a cave then & why are you even posting this ? Be the change you want to see bro/sis ?
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 26 minutes ago
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.