Beyond Enshittification: Hostile

The computer is not just working less well. Instead, it is actively trying to undermine you. And there is nothing you can do about it. When Windows wants to update, you don't get to say "no." You get "Update now" or "Remind me later." When Twitter shows you notifications from people you don't follow, you can't dismiss them, only "see less often." When LinkedIn changes your email preferences, you'll reset them, only to find they've reverted a few months later.

These aren't bugs. They aren't oversights. They're deliberate design choices that remove your ability to say no. It's not dark patterns anymore. It's not even enshittification. It's pure hostility.

The Two Types of Users

As developers, there are two types of users we find extremely annoying.

The first is the user who refuses to get on the latest version of the app. They're not taking advantage of the latest bug fixes we've developed. We're forced to maintain the old API because this user doesn't want to update. They're stubborn, they're stuck in their ways, and they're holding everyone back.

The second type of user is the one who's clueless about updates. It's not that they don't want to update, they don't even know there is such a thing as an update. They can be annoying because they'll eventually start complaining that the app doesn't work. But they'll do everything short of actually updating it.

Well, I fall into the first category. I understand it's annoying, but I also know that developers will often change the app in ways that don't suit me. I download an app when it's brand new and has no ads, when the developer is still passionate about the project, pouring their heart and soul into it, making sure the user experience is a priority. That's the version I like.

Because shortly after, as the metrics settle in and they want to monetize, the focus switches from being user-centric to business-centric. In Cory Doctorow's words, this is where "enshittification" starts.

Now, I'm not against a developer trying to make a buck, or millions for that matter. But I am against degrading the user experience to maximize profit.

Companies have figured out how to eliminate the first type of user entirely. They've weaponized updates to force compliance. Apps that won't launch without updating. Operating systems that update despite your settings. Games that require online connection to play single-player campaigns. Software that stops working if you don't agree to new terms of service.

The philosophy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is dead. They killed it. And they can get away with it because of the network effect. We are trapped in it.

The Network Effect Trap

You use Windows because your workplace uses Windows. You use Excel because your colleagues use Excel. You use Slack because your team uses Slack. You use WhatsApp because your family uses WhatsApp.

When Windows suddenly requires you to have a Microsoft account (an online account) just to log into your local computer, what are your options? Switch to Apple? After twenty years of Windows shortcuts, file systems, and muscle memory? Switch to Linux? When you need to share files with colleagues who use proprietary Microsoft formats?

You can't. And they know you can't.

They're not competing on quality anymore. They're leveraging your professional dependency, your colleagues' software choices, your decade of learned workflows. You're not a customer who might leave if the product gets worse. You're a captive audience. This is why the hostility is possible. This is why they can get away with it.

Hostile Software

Enshittification, as Doctorow describes it, is a process of degradation. First, platforms are good to users to build market share. Then they abuse users to favor business customers. Finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves.

But what we're seeing now is different. This isn't neglect or the natural decay of a profit-maximizing business. This is the deliberate, systematic removal of user agency.

You are presented with the illusion of choice. You can update now or update later, but you cannot choose to never update. You can see less often, but you cannot choose to never see it. You can accept all cookies instantly, or you can navigate through a deliberately complex maze of toggles and submenus to reject them one by one.

They borrow ransomware patterns. Notifications you can't dismiss, only snooze. Warnings that your system is "at risk" if you don't update immediately. Except once you update, the computer is restarted and you are presented with new terms you have to agree in order to access your computer.

Every Windows update that turns Bing back on and forces all links to open with Edge. Every app update that re-enables notifications you turned off. Every platform that opts you back into marketing emails and makes you opt out again.

Updates are now scary because they can take you from a version that serves your interest, to a version that services the company's. The update that adds telemetry. The update that removes features you relied on. The update that makes the app slower, more bloated, more aggressive about upselling you.

These aren't accidents. They're not the result of developers who don't care or designers who don't know better. They're the result of product meetings where someone said "users are rejecting this, how do we force them to accept it?" and someone else said "remove the 'no' button."

---

As a developer, and someone who has been using computers since I was 5 years old, I don't really care about the operating system. I can use them interchangeably. In fact, I don't care about Twitter, or any of these platforms.

When I log into my computer it's to write a document. When I use my mobile device, it's to talk to my friends or family. When I access my dev machine, it's to do my job. The operating systems or the platforms are secondary to the task at hand.

The software is supposed to be the tool, not the obstacle. But now the tool demands tribute. It demands your data, your attention, your compliance with whatever new terms it has decided to impose.

You can't switch because switching costs everything. Your time, your muscle memory, your compatibility with everyone else who's also trapped. The network effect isn't just about other people using the same platform. It's about your own accumulated investment in learning, customization, and integration.

So when they add hostile features, when they remove your ability to say no, when they force you to have an online account for offline work, when they interrupt you with notifications you can't dismiss, when they change interfaces you've spent years mastering, you can only accept it.

Not because you want to. Not because it's better. Because you have no choice. And that's not enshittification. That's hostility.

---