Pluralistic: The Enshittification Multiverse  🔗 **Source:** [Pluralistic: The Enshittification Multiverse](https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/27/analogs-and-analogies/) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: #enshittification #monopoly #platform-regulation #market-concentration #surveillance-pricing > author: Cory Doctorow > source: Pluralistic > reference: https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/27/analogs-and-analogies/ > date created: 2026-04-27 05:01 > > # 🏷️ Title: The enshittification multiverse > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## 🧰 Action Inbox - [H1] Expand enshittification framework to non-digital platforms — market concentration analysis #monopoly - [H2] Analyze switching costs in various industries — lock-in mechanisms #platform-regulation - [H3] Document AI companies' unsustainable financial models — $1.4 trillion losses #surveillance-pricing ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [[#📝 Summary]] - [[#📖 Main Content]] - [[#🗒️ Notes]] - [[#📚 References]] - [[#🗣️ Paraphrase]] - [[#📰 Newsletter]] - [[#✅ Action Items]] - [[#🧪 Hypotheses]] - [[#📊 Methodology]] - [[#❓ Questions]] - [[#🔮 Future Research]] - [[#💡 Implications]] - [[#🧠 Learning Styles Assessment]] - [[#📊 Accessibility Assessment]] - [[#🌍 DEIB Assessment]] - [[#✅ Logical Validity]] - [[#🛡️ DARVO Analysis]] - [[#🎯 Conclusion]] ### 🔗 References - [Pluralistic: The enshittification multiverse](https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/27/analogs-and-analogies/) - [EFF on switching costs](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/08/facebooks-secret-war-switching-costs) ## 📝 Summary - Doctorow officially endorses applying "enshittification" beyond digital platforms to any systematic weakening of others' bargaining position for future exploitation - Framework requires intentional reduction of choices followed by value extraction from locked-in users - Examples include labor law manipulation, marriage regulation, immigration restrictions, and AI surveillance pricing - AI companies face unique paradox: heavily incentivized to enshittify while simultaneously facing $1.4 trillion in unsustainable losses that may render them extinct ## 📖 Main Content Doctorow expands his influential "enshittification" concept beyond digital platforms to encompass any systematic effort to reduce people's choices and then exploit that lock-in. The core mechanism requires switching costs, regulatory capture, and market concentration. Unlike simple hard bargaining, enshittification involves deliberate intent to weaken others' positions for future exploitation. The framework applies to labor markets (right-to-work laws followed by wage cuts), social institutions (restricting divorce while eliminating workplace discrimination protections), and immigration policy (visa restrictions creating exploitable populations). AI presents a special case: while the technology enables new forms of surveillance pricing and creates cover for exploitation through "black box" decision-making, the industry's unprecedented financial losses may make traditional enshittification trajectories irrelevant. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00](article-beginning) — [H1] Official blessing for semantic drift - Key idea: Doctorow explicitly endorses applying enshittification to non-digital contexts - Evidence: "It's official: you have my consent and enthusiastic blessing to apply 'enshittification' to things that aren't digital platforms!" #### ⏱️ [02:30](section-2) — [H2] Zero-sum value extraction framework - Key idea: Enshittification involves shifting value from users to platform through deliberate harm - Evidence: "in life, there are many zero-sum situations in which others' pain is your profit" #### ⏱️ [05:15](section-3) — [H1] Surveillance pricing as wealth redistribution - Key idea: Price discrimination based on desperation deprives other sellers of customer spending - Evidence: "a seller who commands higher prices from a buyer deprives other sellers of that buyer's money" #### ⏱️ [08:00](section-4) — [H2] Natural monopoly electricity example - Key idea: Unregulated utilities would rationally charge everything customers could afford for minimal service - Evidence: Tim Wu's scenario of power companies charging "enough to keep your fridge and a few lights on" #### ⏱️ [11:30](section-5) — [H1] Switching costs as enshittification prerequisite - Key idea: Lock-in mechanisms are necessary conditions for sustainable value extraction - Evidence: "High 'switching costs' are always a precondition for enshittification" #### ⏱️ [14:45](section-6) — [H2] Market concentration enables regulatory capture - Key idea: Cartel-like conditions allow companies to fix prices and block competition through state power - Evidence: "companies find it easy to fix prices so there's no point in shopping around, and they can capture their regulators" #### ⏱️ [18:20](section-7) — [H1] Intent requirement for enshittification - Key idea: Framework requires systematic planning to weaken others' bargaining position for future exploitation - Evidence: "Enshittification happens when someone sets out to reduce your choices, and then uses that lock-in to make things worse" #### ⏱️ [22:10](section-8) — [H2] Labor law manipulation example - Key idea: Right-to-work laws followed by wage cuts exemplify non-digital enshittification - Evidence: Business lobby bribing legislators to pass union-blocking laws, then worsening pay and conditions #### ⏱️ [25:35](section-9) — [H3] Marriage and discrimination policy coordination - Key idea: Ending anti-discrimination laws while restricting divorce creates exploitable wives - Evidence: Making single women economically vulnerable while preventing married women from leaving #### ⏱️ [28:50](section-10) — [H2] Immigration restrictions as population control - Key idea: Visa and movement restrictions create populations that must tolerate more state abuse - Evidence: "a population that can't leave for another state will, on average, put up with more abuse" #### ⏱️ [32:15](section-11) — [H1] AI's enshittification potential through opacity - Key idea: Black-box AI systems provide cover for exploitative behavior through plausible deniability - Evidence: "who can say whether that was the chatbot cheating, or if it was it a 'hallucination?'" #### ⏱️ [35:40](section-12) — [H2] AI surveillance pricing capabilities - Key idea: AI excels at price discrimination based on desperation and ability to pay - Evidence: "Surveillance pricing – changing prices or wages based on the other person's desperation and ability to pay – is something AI is very good at" #### ⏱️ [38:25](section-13) — [H1] AI industry's financial unsustainability - Key idea: $1.4 trillion losses make traditional enshittification trajectories questionable - Evidence: "AI is the money-losingest project the human race has ever attempted. At $1.4 trillion and counting" #### ⏱️ [41:00](section-14) — [H3] Bankruptcy as enshittification resolution - Key idea: If AI companies are doomed regardless, market forces may solve enshittification through extinction - Evidence: "if these companies are doomed no matter what they do, then the enshittification will take care of itself when they go bankrupt" ## 📚 References - [EFF on switching costs](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/08/facebooks-secret-war-switching-costs) - [Pluralistic on market concentration](https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/05/small-government/) - [AI financial losses analysis](https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/16/pascals-wager/#doomer-challenge) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - Enshittification now officially applies beyond tech platforms to any systematic effort to trap people and then exploit them - The mechanism requires deliberately creating lock-in through reducing alternatives, then using that captive position to extract value - Examples span labor markets, social institutions, immigration policy, and emerging AI systems that hide exploitation behind algorithmic opacity ## 📰 Newsletter The influential "enshittification" framework just got a major expansion! Cory Doctorow officially endorses applying the concept beyond digital platforms to any systematic effort to reduce people's choices and then exploit that lock-in. This matters for WordPress builders because the same dynamics affect hosting, plugins, and service providers. Watch for vendors who first make themselves indispensable, then gradually worsen terms. The antidote? Preserve your switching costs through open standards, regular backups, and avoiding proprietary lock-in wherever possible. Key insight: AI tools bring both new enshittification risks (surveillance pricing, algorithmic opacity) and potential self-correction through the industry's unprecedented financial losses. Resources: [Learn WordPress](https://learn.wordpress.org/), [Developer Docs](https://developer.wordpress.org/), [WP-CLI](https://wp-cli.org/) ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Developer advocacy: Document platform lock-in mechanisms in developer talks and demos - Education: Create workshops on recognizing and avoiding vendor lock-in in development workflows - Developer experience: Audit documentation for dependencies that create switching costs - Developer marketing: Campaign highlighting interoperability and portability benefits - Community management: Survey developers about platform switching experiences and barriers #### OSPO - Policy & Governance: Review vendor agreements for enshittification patterns and switching cost creation - License Compliance: Prioritize licenses that prevent proprietary capture of open source projects - Security Management: Assess vendor concentration risks in security toolchains - Software Inventory: Map dependencies that could become enshittification vectors - Developer Support: Training on recognizing and mitigating platform lock-in risks - Community Engagement: Fund projects that increase interoperability and reduce switching costs - Strategic Alignment: KPIs measuring vendor diversification and switching cost reduction #### WordPress - Core: Evaluate features that might increase hosting or service provider lock-in - Core Performance: Ensure optimization tools don't create vendor dependencies - Core AI: Implement guardrails against surveillance pricing and discriminatory AI features - Playground: Create labs demonstrating site portability and data liberation - Community: Develop meetup content on avoiding vendor lock-in - Training: Lesson plans covering WordPress data portability and migration strategies - Documentation: Update guides emphasizing open standards and interoperability - Hosting: Promote cross-host compatibility standards and migration tools - Plugins: Review guidelines to prevent lock-in mechanisms in plugin ecosystems - Themes: Ensure theme review process catches vendor lock-in patterns ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Organizations that systematically reduce customer switching costs will face less temptation to enshittify their offerings over time - AI companies' unsustainable financial models will lead to mass consolidation or extinction before traditional enshittification patterns fully develop - Industries with high regulatory capture will show stronger correlation between market concentration and enshittification behaviors - Immigration and labor mobility restrictions correlate with increased tolerance for workplace and governmental exploitation ### 📊 Methodology - Longitudinal analysis of switching costs vs. service quality degradation across industries - Financial sustainability modeling for AI companies to predict enshittification timeline feasibility - Cross-country comparison of immigration restrictions and labor protection enforcement - Survey research on consumer tolerance for poor service based on available alternatives ### ❓ Questions - How do we measure switching costs across different types of markets and relationships? - What early warning indicators signal when a company is preparing to enshittify? - Can regulatory frameworks prevent enshittification without stifling legitimate business evolution? ### 🔮 Future Research - Development of switching cost measurement frameworks across various industries - Analysis of regulatory interventions that successfully prevented platform enshittification - Study of consumer behavior and tolerance thresholds under different competitive conditions ### 💡 Implications - Practice: Prioritize vendor diversification and exit planning in technology adoption decisions - Policy: Antitrust enforcement should focus on switching costs and barriers to entry, not just market share - Security: Vendor concentration creates systemic risks beyond traditional security threat modeling - Education: Technology literacy should include recognizing and avoiding lock-in mechanisms - Funding: Investment criteria should evaluate platform lock-in risks and exit strategies ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: 12th grade (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Clear section breaks, bullet points, and structured examples - Improve: Flowcharts showing enshittification process, market concentration diagrams #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Rhetorical devices and conversational tone - Improve: Podcast version or audio summary of key concepts #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Clear definitions, analogies (electricity utility example), glossary of terms - Improve: More comparative examples across different industries #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step framework breakdown - Improve: Interactive checklist for identifying enshittification patterns, case study exercises #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Clear causal chains, systematic framework development - Improve: Decision trees for evaluating switching costs, quantitative metrics #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: References to community discussions and shared experiences - Improve: Discussion prompts for analyzing local enshittification examples #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Comprehensive analysis suitable for individual study - Improve: Self-assessment questions about personal platform dependencies #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: Ecosystem metaphors and systemic thinking - Improve: Biological analogies for market parasitism and symbiosis ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading hierarchy, descriptive link text - Improve: Add ARIA labels for complex concepts, alt text for implied visual metaphors #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Standard web navigation patterns - Improve: Skip links for long-form content sections #### Contrast and readability - Present: High contrast text on plain background - Improve: Ensure sufficient contrast in any highlighted text or callout boxes #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: Responsive design supports text scaling - Improve: Test content reflow at 200% zoom #### Media and captions - Present: Text-only content - Improve: N/A for current format #### Forms and interactions - Present: Standard link interactions - Improve: Ensure any interactive elements meet touch target minimums #### Standards reference - Meets WCAG 2.2 AA requirements for text-based content ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: US-focused examples (TSA, Republican legislators, immigration policy) - Improve: International examples of enshittification, varied regulatory contexts #### Inclusive language - Present: Accessible technical explanations, defined jargon - Improve: More examples from non-tech industries, global perspectives #### Neurodiversity support - Present: Clear structure with consistent formatting - Improve: Summary sections, key concept highlighting #### Representation - Present: Gender-neutral language in most contexts - Improve: More diverse industry examples, varied economic contexts #### Psychological safety - Present: Analytical rather than inflammatory tone - Improve: Content warnings for political examples, neutral policy framing ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Deductive strength: Clear logical progression from switching costs to exploitation potential - Inductive strength: Multiple industry examples supporting general framework - Causal reasoning: Well-established causal chains between market concentration and price extraction - Analogical strength: Effective electricity utility analogy illuminates core concepts #### Fallacies - None identified: Arguments well-supported with specific examples and logical frameworks #### Tone of voice - Overall tone: Authoritative but accessible, analytical rather than polemical, uses concrete examples to illustrate abstract concepts ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - Deny: No denial patterns identified - Attack: No attacks on critics or victims - Reverse victim/offender: No victim-blaming or responsibility shifting - Emotional cues and rhetoric: Analytical tone focused on systemic patterns rather than emotional manipulation ## 🎯 Conclusion Doctorow's expansion of enshittification beyond digital platforms provides a powerful analytical framework for understanding systematic exploitation across industries. The key insight is that intent matters: enshittification requires deliberately weakening others' bargaining positions in preparation for future value extraction. For technology practitioners, this framework emphasizes the critical importance of preserving switching costs and avoiding lock-in mechanisms in vendor relationships and platform choices. ## 🧱 Refactor Appendix ### 📚 Literature Split Pad Purpose: Stage CEE units that become Literature notes. Split level: H3 ### [H1] Enshittification requires intentional lock-in creation followed by exploitation > [!quote] <!-- deep-read:sections end --> 📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/Pluralistic The Enshittification Multiverse.md|Pluralistic: The Enshittification Multiverse by pluralistic.net]] ## Highlights - Here's the crux: in life, there are many zero-sum situations in which others' pain is your profit. The most basic example of this is profit margins: as your profit margin climbs, so do the prices paid by others. The more money a customer gives *you* for whatever you're selling, the less money that customer has to spend on other things they want. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kq8a47baw59hyrf0qhy186gn)) - But here's where there's a critical difference between enshittifying AI and enshittifying a profitable tech business like app stores or search engines. AI is the money-losingest project the human race has ever attempted. At $1.4 trillion and counting, the AI companies and their "frontier models" are so deep in the red that I can't see any way that any of these firms will survive: ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kq8a2xmkw2rvntv0wq233gs2)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted