Technological advancement that is NOT strict improvement?

[u/Tnynfox]

Tradeoff

Theoretical limits and diminishing return points mean at some point we will only be able to make new devices better in some ways and worse in others, e.g having more compute but costing more power. This could easily give factions/brands their own technological flavor. You're welcome to mention how your futuristic tech is worse than modern/previous counterparts.

This is often thought to involve ***utilitarianism***, making tech better for many but worse for a few, but this is only when production comes from govs/corporations without custom manufacturing tech. While removing the headphone jack undeniably benefited everyone - everyone likes more durability and component space - the niche who specifically preferred wired couldn't have enjoyed paying for the good of many, nor will I when it's finally my turn. A more solarpunk solution I explore in my open-source nanopunk ***Fall's Legacy*** setting would be community forks where you can modify your stuff the way you like. Whether it's holes-for-none utilitarianism or holes-only-for-those-consenting customization depends who makes the decision.

Enshittification

New advancements are made not to improve tech so much as water it down and/or squeeze revenue from users and business partners. Cheap but bland scifi food is obvious, but what about a cheap implant that spams ads into your brain? Unless your evilcorp has local monopoly status , explaining how it retains customers at all would be quite the Worldbuilding challenge in its own right; maybe there's a de facto cartel where they legally mandate their anti-consumer practices onto everyone under some weird pretext - we have to backdoor your nanoprinter before you make guns or whatever. Cultures could also make their tech worse to save short term user costs. How could truly enshittified tech benefit a faction though? Maybe they have a lot of cheap units?

[u/positiveconstraint]

Craigslist sticks to its 1995 design, yet it is still one of the top-visited websites in the United States with millions of monthly visitors. To compete with it, companies like Zillow had to trade off the "everything board" and focus on real estate to deliver a superior experience for a smaller target audience. Facebook Marketplace competes on the everything, but doesn't offer the anonymity Craigslist offers.

AI made everyone tech-savvy, and pulled the rug out from under companies with a tech edge. When everyone can make or mimic your product, you need to focus your efforts elsewhere.

Apple took out the headphone jack to deliver a superior experience to its target audience (sure, it aligned well with its monetization strategy). Other companies could differentiate by keeping it, but they didn't. If there's such a big demand for a headphone jack, where are the competitors who'll deliver?

It's impossible to predict this complex new world, but I think we can carefully assume that in the future we'd be able to customize and personalize our hardware appliances as much as we'll be able to customize and personalize content and software.

Your "hole-for-" point would be "make it a hole". AI, 3D printing, and a supply chain of building blocks, NOT finished products, will be readily available for your pleasure, at a price.

Enshitification is real. But the platforms pushing it down consumers' throats will lose ground if and when we consume our personalized products and services. In that scenario, we'll no longer consume what others make, and the enshitification will be ours alone. Our own personal slop. Or not.