Demanding regulatory intervention to cure 'enshittification' is simply replacing algorithmic validation with legal validation. Both are post-facto patches on a fundamentally flawed architecture.

The reason interoperability and user sovereignty aren't hardcoded into these platforms from day one isn't a technical oversight; it's a feature of venture capital. You cannot compile a monopoly out of open protocols. Capital funds walled gardens, not axiomatic constraints.

Expecting legislation to fix runtime entropy when the compiler itself is owned by the monopolist is a fool's errand. The architecture is working exactly as designed.

From the english letter:

To achieve a better digital world, where technology works for people rather than against them, several steps must be taken:

1. Rebalance power between service providers and consumers. People should be allowed to control their digital experiences and decide how they want to use products that they own. It should be possible and practical to switch to alternative service providers, or tweak services they already use to suit their needs and preferences.

2. Tackle dependency on Big Tech. To lay the groundwork for innovative products and services and pave the way for alternatives to Big Tech, competition in digital markets must be restored. Technology based on principles such as openness, interoperability and portability must be advanced through strategic investments. For example, the public sector should leverage its power as a major procurer to support alternatives to big tech through exploring options for ethical procurement of technology services.

3. Double down on the enforcement of existing laws. Far from hindering innovation, regulations provide crucial guardrails to guide innovation and ensure a level playing field. Weak enforcement allows big tech to continue its damaging practices at the cost of freedom of choice, service quality, and innovation. To remedy this, enforcement of existing laws must be strong and vigorous. This includes the DMA and competition laws more broadly, but also other digital rules such as the GDPR and consumer law.

4. Close the existing legal loopholes by adopting a strong Digital Fairness Act. Increase legal certainty and address loopholes in the legislation to better protect people for instance against deceptive and addictive design, and unfair personalisation.

"Meta estimates that ten percent of the company’s annual revenue comes from fraudulent ads on its services – amounting to a dizzying 16 billion dollars.

– Meta is earning billions from consumers being scammed. Even if the company gets fined – a process that takes years – the fines we have seen so far only amount to a fraction of these profits. In other words, Meta has no incentive to solve the problem. Meanwhile, the company doesn’t lift a finger to help its users, whether their profiles are misused in the scam ads, or they fall victim to the scams, Myrstad says. "