Comment by andy99

Comment by andy99 4 days ago

3 replies

You’re both making similar points I think. It was “bad” - for all the reasons you mention, but back then it was done seemingly to try to add functionality that people wanted, it was just shitty, and that was as bad as it gets.

Now nothing is done even remotely to try and help the customer. Every feature and every stupid “nudge” is done with pure malice, as the thinnest possible pretext to extract more information, more ad revenue, etc. from the user.

Clippy sucked, it would be nice if it still represented the worst kind of corporate shenanigans, but now it’s benign and naive compared to the evil rapaciousness arrayed against us by virtually all modern software.

throwaway150 4 days ago

So my point stands doesn't it? If Clippy was as hostile as it could be with the technology available then, and the trillion dollar companies hoarding our data are as hostile as they can be with the technology present now, is Clippy a good mascot for an initiative like this or is it a good mascot for the trillion dollar companies?

  • chongli 4 days ago

    Clippy is a mascot for the trillion dollar companies. It's emblematic of the beginning of the end of user-centric computing. It marks the new era of intrusive business-centric computing.

    It's not about data or technology at all. It's about property rights. User-centric computers (ideally) don't do anything their users don't want them to do. Business-centric computers don't care about what the user wants; they serve the interests of business (either the manufacturer or the user's employer).

  • oneeyedpigeon 3 days ago

    I think it's a good choice precisely because it's so bad. It's like "Remember how this thing seemed like the worst thing imaginable? Now it seems utterly harmless."