this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2025
396 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

75989 readers
3741 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 28 points 2 days ago (4 children)

All of the examples are commercial products. The author doesn't know or doesn't realize that this is a capitalist problem. Of course, there is bloat in some open source projects. But nothing like what is described in those examples.

And I don't think you can avoid that if you're a capitalist. You make money by adding features that maybe nobody wants. And you need to keep doing something new. Maintenance doesn't make you any money.

So this looks like AI plus capitalism.

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 days ago

Sometimes, I feel like writers know that it's capitalism, but they don't want to actually call the problem what it is, for fear of scaring off people who would react badly to it. I think there's probably a place for this kind of oblique rhetoric, but I agree with you that progress is unlikely if we continue pussyfooting around the problem

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

But the tooling gets bloatier too, even if it does the same. Extrem example Android apps.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (5 children)

You make money by adding features that maybe nobody wants

So, um, who buys them?

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

It's just about convincing investors that you're going places. Customers don't have to want your new features or buy more of your stuff because it has them. Users certainly don't have to want or use them. Just do buzzword-driven development and keep the investors convinced that you're the future.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Capitalism's biggest lie is that people have freedom to chose what to buy. They have to buy what the ruling class sells them. When every billionaire is obsessed with chatbots, every app has a chatbot attached, and if you don't want a chatbot, sucks to be you then, you have to pay for it anyway.

[–] Manticore@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago

Sponsors maybe? Adding features because somebody influential wants them to be there. Either for money (like shovelware) or soft power (strengthening ongoing business partnerships)

[–] kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

A midlevel director who doesn't use the tool but thinks all the features the salesperson mentioned seem cool

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago

Stockholders

Stockholders want the products they own stock in to have AI features so they won't be 'left behind'

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

"Open source" is not contradictory to "capitalist", just involves a fair bit of industry alliances and\or freeloading.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

“Open source” was literally invented to make Free software palatable to capitol.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

It absolutely is to the majority of capitalists unless it still somehow directly benefits them monetarily