> one could argue that if doing so increases profits, then on average, you actually solved the needs of your customers
Which often isn't the case.
Companies have lots of priorities that have nothing to do with end users at all. For example:
- it does not matter how good your product is, if your company dies because there's a competitor that does not need to make profit and can temporarily offer their services for free, until your company is driven out of the market
- dark patterns are well documented examples how working directly against good user experience can increase profits
- lobbying politicians to drive out competition is extremely profitable, and does not take interests of the userbase into account at all
There are probably numerous other, obvious examples how capitalism disincentivises companies from serving their customers well, but instead incentivizes gaming the system.
The correlation between user experience and profitability is shaky at best. One could argue that user experience has almost nothing to with how businesses operate.
Of course. But I'm talking about being rewarded due to inherent rewards associated in the system by gaming it. There is a difference between a system that punishes bad behavior vs. a system that rewards it.
different systems will punish / reward different kinds of bad behaviour so its tit for tat. the only system that could uniformly punish bad behaviour and reward good would be one controlled by a god like being.
No system is perfect, of course, but I do think the people need a stronger democratic voice. A few big consolidated megacorporations make countless non-democratic decisions that affect huge amounts of people. Companies having are too much power in our society, considering that their motives mainly with the shareholders, not the population as a whole. I think we could at least do a bit better on it, even if its through slow reforms. Politics is probably complicated enough subject that I doubt we'll ever be perfect at it, but at least we could do a better job in mitigating their worst behaviours through legislation? I mean, the ultra-rich don't even pay any taxes, how fair is that?
Which often isn't the case.
Companies have lots of priorities that have nothing to do with end users at all. For example:
- it does not matter how good your product is, if your company dies because there's a competitor that does not need to make profit and can temporarily offer their services for free, until your company is driven out of the market
- dark patterns are well documented examples how working directly against good user experience can increase profits
- lobbying politicians to drive out competition is extremely profitable, and does not take interests of the userbase into account at all
There are probably numerous other, obvious examples how capitalism disincentivises companies from serving their customers well, but instead incentivizes gaming the system.
The correlation between user experience and profitability is shaky at best. One could argue that user experience has almost nothing to with how businesses operate.