Money is just a number and far less precious than personal dignity and privacy. I don't even get the idea why people really would compare something around 1k usd range in developed countries, it's a no brainer.

Say, you have 98 people who have literally nothing and no established way to obtain basic needs, and 2 people who has something based on whatever.

Say, these 2 people can close their needs by asking a magic machine to do something for them, or even exchange some goods between each other, but there is no economic sense to hire anybody.

Those 98 left aren't going to sit and die, watching.

The whole modern society and capitalism exist on assumption of meritocracy: an entrepreneur takes the risks and provides the organization and gets the reward. If there is some perfect machine that always brings profits, there is no risk. Everybody can make such "organization" saying "/goal make me money". The current model also assumes that if you learn and work hard enough, then you get a success of some level. That assumption of the meritocracy also breaks.

If there is no organizational work, nor risks, nor meritocracy, nor "fair reward for hard work" the whole model fades. There are might be different rational choices. One is probably to liquidate the owners of the companies; nationalize the model's output and distribute the profits, for example. Still many questions about everyday life for completely jobless society will arrive then. It might be something else, but people generally do what they see fair, and they also want to eat something.

Ownership is a fragile idea, Russian Empire shows that pretty clearly. It exists only when most of the society agrees that the ownership is fair or when you have enough force to maintain it against those who don't, which is not the case when the majority is on the other side.

If at some point most enterprises run as "agent, make me money" without any humans, then money is a dead concept.

If most of the population doesn't participate in the exchange, money is worthless. You can make numbers, but those are meaningless without the underlying exchange.

It's effectively a disruption of a modern society.

That will trigger very interesting consequences.

That's life, spies going to spy, state psychopaths from the military and the three-latter agencies exist regardless whether you see them or not and they don't care about the "common good". They must be taken into the account.

The less power humans have over each other - the better. Instead of pressuring each other to bring profits people would be able to speak like equals.

For example, the banking app I have refuses to be installed from the Play Store on GrapheneOS due to "not-certified" device, but works perfectly fine when installed by Aurora.

The check seems to be purely store-based and never enforced later.

If everyone is doing the job of hundreds, extremely productive and everything is so easily fixed, why everything feels so slow and broken, even so basic things? That's kind of the point. I'd expect nearly perfect websites everywhere, especially from "productivity" people who mastered the flow.

Yet the simple blog website static page saying that looks very weird and broken on the desktop firefox.

How large should be a development team to make proper margins in 2026?

The current biggest problem is reputation and QA. Ie I see hundreds of same kind of apps when I search for open source stuff on F-Droid, but I can't really say whether it was properly audited with current influx of vibe-coded stuff, whether it contains malware, is it fully vibe-coded or human evaluated the result, etc. which one of those hundreds is actually good?

When we solve the slop recognition problem, we can actually see a positive turn from enshittification, because copying products overnight without spyware became almost trivial.

They usually have a very decent moderation and if they say that an entry has some particular resolution/subs/audio then it has it.

Sure, you have to stay as a seeder for some ratio/period in such trackers and can't hit-and-run, but it gives a warm feeling of contributions anyway.

And if enough people stand out, it doesn't matter anymore.

> To request a user's age range and sharing status, you call the Play Age Signals API (beta) from your app at runtime. The default age ranges the API returns are 0-12, 13-15, 16-17, and 18+, but you can receive custom age ranges.

https://developer.android.com/google/play/age-signals/use-ag...

But I don't find it any better. I don't see any viable reason to provide identification to my phone's OS. If a parent buys a phone for their child, they can already set up parental controls before handing it over.

I wish Motorola all the best with their GrapheneOS partnership.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49107950

Points: 423

# Comments: 525