Shopify CEO Says Staffers Need To Prove Jobs Can't Be Done By AI Before Asking for More Headcount (cnbc.com) 106
Shopify CEO Tobi Lutke is changing his company's approach to hiring in the age of AI. Employees will be expected to prove why they "cannot get what they want done using AI" before asking for more headcount and resources, Lutke wrote in a memo to staffers that he posted to X. From a report: "What would this area look like if autonomous AI agents were already part of the team?" Lutke wrote in the memo, which was sent to employees late last month. "This question can lead to really fun discussions and projects." Lutke also said there's a "fundamental expectation" across Shopify that employees embrace AI in their daily work, saying it has been a "multiplier" of productivity for those who have used it.
"I've seen many of these people approach implausible tasks, ones we wouldn't even have chosen to tackle before, with reflexive and brilliant usage of AI to get 100X the work done," Lutke wrote. The company, which sells web-based software that helps online retailers manage sales and run their operations, will factor AI usage into performance reviews, he added.
"I've seen many of these people approach implausible tasks, ones we wouldn't even have chosen to tackle before, with reflexive and brilliant usage of AI to get 100X the work done," Lutke wrote. The company, which sells web-based software that helps online retailers manage sales and run their operations, will factor AI usage into performance reviews, he added.
Factor of performance reviews (Score:5, Insightful)
The 25 year olds might not yet understand this, but "AI factored into perfromance reviews" from the people exploiting your labor means they want 100x productivity and you get 3% raise.
Good idea. (Score:1)
Let's start by applying that concept to the CEO position first.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Good idea. (Score:2)
Great. The entire C-suite can be replaced by an AI and a software engineer. Management task are generally signal processing tasks anyway which AI is good at. The real work is done by the non-management position and AI is not very good at handling those tasks anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
RoR doesn't count as programming surely.
Re: (Score:2)
Today's CEO exists this staff to leverage AI and deliver them better insights and analysis, faster, and also more accurate. The modern CEO, like their C-level counterparts, relies on the information from their team, their accumulated experience and wisdom, and examination of the overall environment and market(s) to make good decisions. AI can amplify the value of those inputs they use to do so.
The other C-level inhabitants are on their own, best of luck.
Re: (Score:2)
And of course, 'exists this' is properly spell checked as 'relies on'... No apology is sufficient.
Re:Good idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Honestly, many AI models would make great CEO's. They do a good job at sounding confident and convincing while explaining things, even when they get the technical details wrong. Better yet, they're "smart" enough to never admit to being wrong unless you specifically call them out on it. That level of narcissism takes humans years to master, yet they have it down solid. I guess that digesting terabytes of Internet marketing fluff into your learning model is just as effective as an MBA from a top business school.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually nobody in my company who does actual work got more than 2.7% raise. Some got 0%. The CFO said we workers get paid enough already, but those poor Sheiks who invested in us through Blackrock Group want more stock buybacks to inflate their oceans of oil money.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The 25 year olds might not yet understand this, but "AI factored into perfromance reviews" from the people exploiting your labor means they want 100x productivity and you get 3% raise.
Cant wait to see what AI-enhanced Boards can do for the shareholder against CEOs. Let’s see how much the average executive enjoys the expectation of working 100x harder for that 3% raise in stock price.
Funny part about being beholden to Greed at that level. Get to work, you lazy bitch. My portfolio ain’t gonna pump itself.
Re: (Score:3)
Never heard of this shoplify, what's the product it manufactures and how is it different from the competition?
Assuming you aren't joking, then its one of the largest e-commerce platforms around. There is a good chance on of the many online stores you use make use of it, for their shopfront.
You can also check Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Correct, of course. If you are trying to buy something on a website and it is really really annoying to use, that is because the buying part of it is provided by Shopify.
Re: (Score:2)
"it is really really annoying to use"
Actually that sounds like Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not sure what this is so I'll ask... (Score:2)
Re: Not sure what this is so I'll ask... (Score:5, Interesting)
Shopify sites that suck can be chalked up mostly to bad implementations, IMO.
Having written (from scratch) the data feed from an ERP system to / from Shopify, you are right: implementation is king here. Screw that up, and your site is toast.
The data feed I wrote transfers Shopify orders into the ERP every 10 minutes, order updates daily and inventory updates twice a day. It took six months to write this interface, and getting gift cards to work was a right pain (how many notes do you see with confusing discounts and gift cards?).
Regardless of vendor, the site proprietor is probably going to fuck up their instance through incompetence/negligence.
If it weren't for the automatic feeds, the business would be overwhelmed by the number of orders. With the site running really well, they mostly leave it alone until they have new products to sell.
However...
I've also been (partially) involved with a failed rollout. The client spent half a million dollars on the site (and other properties, such as content managements systems), mostly because the implementation team (another division of the company I work for, unfortunately) promised they could eliminate the need for their ERP system through their brilliant design. The ERP system was reduced to a data feed based on SQL views. It was so bad the client pulled the pin a week before go-live.
In both cases, Shopify as a platform worked well. The implementation team makes or breaks it.
Re: (Score:1)
What is this "market cap"? The one that shrunk 20% over the last two weeks? Isn't it a bit too tight for your big brain, Brett?
Him included? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am sure that he is excluded from this asinine rule, no?
In Saudi Arabia (Score:2)
The rules do not apply to the ruling class under any circumstances.
Re: (Score:1)
Hmm, should we use PhbGPT or AssholeGPT?
So that gets applied to the CEO too right? (Score:5, Insightful)
A CEO telling your workers that AI certainly fill in for actual humans, when the CEO themselves could be replaced by a glorified chatbot hooked up to some bank accounts? Maybe the AI would at least realize that asking people to prove a negative is fucking dumb.
Re: (Score:3)
I remember around here in the late 90s and early 2000s, discussing the influx of workers on H1B visas from India.. people would say "why don't the CEOs replace themselves with Indian workers? LOL! LOL!"
Now in 2025: The CEOs of Google, Microsoft, Adobe, IBM, and a whole bunch of other companies are from India.
Re: (Score:2)
Prove a negative? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, "dumb CEO is dumb" seems appropriate here. Although I am not "AI logician". I prefer my logic to work...
Simple, AI wastes time, resources and effort. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Ignoring the incredible privacy violation that AI represents, which is a level of digital molestation, that would scare Epstein, AI can't really do anything on its own, safely. A human still has to handhold AI, and much like a Jr Engineer who never gains skill, you spend all your time helping them, and getting nothing done for yourself.
This. AI hasn't shown it can think. And one would hope you have employees who can think.
This morning I saw this video [youtube.com] on Sabine Hossenfelder's YouTube channel. TL/DW: She talked about a paper whose authors examined how LLMs can predict tokens and appear to get the right answer, without actually understanding what they are doing. The kicker for me was when the researchers asked the LLM to solve an arithmetic problem, and then asked it how it got that answer. The latter explanation did not at all match what t
Re: Simple, AI wastes time, resources and effort. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yes. But he's talking about justifying *headcount increases*. It's a really good idea to scrutinize headcount increase requests because they're often mindless and lazy.
The first time I had a management job where I had to do a department budget, I went around to the other managers and asked them how they prepared their budgets. The answers floored me. Typically it was "I take last year's budget and add 5% to all the line items." What about new things the business plan calls for your department to
Re: (Score:2)
1. Does every job have a second person? If person X gets hit by a bus, is that job screwed? If yes, you need a second person.
2. Do you have enough overall resources? If X, Y and Z are developers, do they have a QA person? Not a person who jumps in, acts like they do QA once every 3 months, and leave, a dedicated QA person? If no, you need to hire.
3. Does anyone sit around or have so little work to do, you're effective paying a chair? If
When you have no strategy, make that "AI" (Score:2)
A new type of utterly dumb CEOs makes its appearance...
Staffers Need To Prove Jobs Can't Be Done By AI? (Score:3)
Shopify CEO Says Staffers Need To Prove Jobs Can't Be Done By AI Before Asking for More Headcount
In any normal business you'd expect management to assess whether a job can be done by AI, and that includes practical pilot testing, before deciding whether or not to introduce AI instead of offloading this on staff. If I was working for Shopify I'd go looking for a new employer with less stupid and lazy management.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. They should all quit and let the CEO try to have everything handled by AI and see how well that would work.
Re: (Score:3)
Shopify CEO Says Staffers Need To Prove Jobs Can't Be Done By AI Before Asking for More Headcount
In any normal business you'd expect management to assess whether a job can be done by AI, and that includes practical pilot testing, before deciding whether or not to introduce AI instead of offloading this on staff. If I was working for Shopify I'd go looking for a new employer with less stupid and lazy management.
I might be taking the wrong meaning from his comments (from the fine article)... but giving him a little credit. I didn't read his thoughts to mean "I will replace you with AI" but rather heard "before I hire you an assistant, I need you to show me a job that AI cannot, instead, do". It caused me to think in terms of "hey, if you are ready to hire, are you sure you need another body if you could instead put some AI tools to work to amplify what you're already doing?"
Re: (Score:2)
"I need you to show me a job that AI cannot, instead, do" ... or basic arithmetic.
Like anything that requires aesthetic judgement
the wave of the future (Score:3)
"The company, which sells web-based software that helps online retailers manage sales and run their operations"
They are selling software, that's their product. Presumably they have a bunch of programmers that wrote the software and it may be a large part of their workforce.
"embrace AI in their daily work, it has been a “multiplier” of productivity for those who have used it."
And he is absolutely correct. You can get a massive productivity boost by using AI assistance for writing and maintaining software. It seems like a lot of people feel threatened by this and they scoff at the idea or attack it. A big mistake. Migration towards AI assistance is basically inevitable at this point. You are either going to embrace the change and ride the wave or you will refuse to participate and get fired. Your choice.
"will factor AI usage into performance reviews, he added."
Damn right.
'He noted that “a higher comp, high-end AI engineer” can lift compensation costs even if headcount is staying the same.'
This "high-end AI engineer" could be you. It's a new field. You could get a jump on it, become what passes for an expert these days and get paid good money. The people who won't do that are going to become increasingly worthless and eventually have to find a new career. Assuming there are any white collar jobs remaining that don't use AI.
Re:the wave of the future - Linux (Score:4, Informative)
When I worked for a rather large corporation, I estimated that I was about 100 times productive on Linux as Windows, simply because Linux was designed from the ground up for engineers.
Even when I mentioned this to the powers that be, they weren't the least bit interested in change. I had to actually change jobs to get back to a Linux workstation. If productivity really was the issue, there wouldn't be a software engineering department in the country that ran Windows. (or at least not one without WSL enabled.)
Re: (Score:2)
I've had some similar experiences. I think this time its different though.
Software developers are expensive and the productivity gains with AI are pretty obvious to the people who actually use it. Like it or not the shift is already occurring.
"In 2024, there were roughly 152,000 roles eliminated across 549 tech companies, according to Layoffs.fyi."
Re:the wave of the future - Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Think about the difference in time between editing each cell of a spreadsheet by hand, and writing a script to do the same thing.
The "Windows Mindset" encourages people to do with a mouse what folks with a UNIX mindset would do with a script. For example, I remember opening header files in VC++ to find function definitions, where as in Linux I would have just grepped it. That's where the 100x improvement comes from - Linux has tools to do the things you'd have to do manually in Windows. Linux is the A
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
From what I've seen with technology this only works if the person using the new technology understands how to use the new technology.
Yes, you can get a massive productivity boost but you can also get a massive productivity drain.
You would think that in this day and age every mass mailing would be personalized at least with the client name. Large organizations mostly manage this but often it's just a form letter like the ones printed in the past. I just got one the other day from the bank addressed to; Dea
Re: (Score:3)
"embrace AI in their daily work, it has been a “multiplier” of productivity for those who have used it."
And he is absolutely correct. You can get a massive productivity boost by using AI assistance for writing and maintaining software. ...
I guess it depends on what you do, but I've found more often than not, Copilot usually gives me something that doesn't work and I have to discard its suggestion and do it myself. It's decent for writing unit tests, some of the time; other times it just screws up the code. I certainly don't feel threatened by it because it works so poorly and I don't see any massive productivity boost by using it. "AI assistance" is definitely a YMMV sort of thing from what I've experienced.
Re: (Score:3)
I like AI best when it gives an apparently working solution that has subtle but important bugs in it that would only be apparent if you know how to do it properly.
Re: (Score:2)
The assistance can be spotty I agree, but rapidly improving. I use it to do the tedious things that can be easily prompted and aren't too hard. Even just that is a big productivity boost.
Re: (Score:2)
You can get a massive productivity boost by using AI assistance for writing and maintaining software.
I wonder how long it will be before that claim softens dramatically...
The assistance can be spotty I agree, but rapidly improving
That was quick. A lot quicker than those alleged 'rapid' improvements that never seem to materialize...
I use it to do the tedious things that can be easily prompted and aren't too hard. Even just that is a big productivity boost.
I'm curious as to what these "tedious things" were, why you were still doing them by hand in the first place, and why you think AI is somehow better than the many significantly faster and more reliable alternatives to handle "tedious" programming tasks.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems like a lot of people feel threatened by this and they scoff at the idea or attack it.
Because they can read the writing on the wall. They know they are getting fired regardless of whether or not they accept AI into their workflow. The AI regardless of their own input (or lack thereof) will eventually out perform them no matter what they do. (They have to eat and sleep, the AI does not. == AI wins the job.)
A big mistake.
Those at the top have no desire to even begin discussing how to deal with the massive unemployment AI is causing. They want everyone not worth 10 billion / year begging for scraps before
Re: (Score:2)
>> Nope. AI can replace that too. They're already trying.
On the one hand I'm seeing people here tell me that AI is useless, can't do anything right, everyone is lying about what it can do.
On the other hand it's already an apocalypse. It will make everyone starve. There's no reason to even try. "Kill AI in the workplace or die."
The employees should just all quit... (Score:2)
Let the CEO try to have everything done by AI and see how well that would work.
Re: (Score:2)
Let the CEO try to have everything done by AI and see how well that would work.
Funny!... but I think you accidentally restated his intent: if I need people, I'll hire people; if AI can help my people do cool stuff, then let's implement that before hiring more people.
Greed killing Greed. For Greeds sake. (Score:2)
Let the CEO try to have everything done by AI and see how well that would work.
Funny!... but I think you accidentally restated his intent: if I need people, I'll hire people; if AI can help my people do cool stuff, then let's implement that before hiring more people.
(The Board): If I need CEOs, I’ll hire CEOs. When AI can sell my flavor of bullshit better and faster than any PT Barnum, CEO ever could, then I’ll hire AI before I hire another CEO to make the stock price go to the moon.
(The Owner): If I need a Board, I’ll hire a Board. When AI can do their lazy-ass job with ease and doesn’t need to be paid in yachts and golf course sized bonuses, FUCK that expense.
(Also The Owner): Wait, where the hell did ALL the paying customers go? Oh shit.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that governing boards are required for certain business types, right?
and when the AI bill blows up? (Score:2)
and when the AI bill blows up?
Another rich clown, hopefully not orange (Score:2)
So Find AI Replacement for their Jobs (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, it'll be fun!
AI has intelligence of a dog (Score:2)
As Yann Lecun says, AI has the intelligence of a dog. I think that means only higher level management functions can be safely replaced by it.
Shopify's Hunger Games: may the best prompt win! (Score:5, Insightful)
It’s not collaboration if you’re competing with the thing you’re supposed to be collaborating with. In the future, your job interview will be a Turing test—and the AI is on the panel.
What’s being sold as an “AI-first” innovation strategy is, in reality, a reframing of resource constraints as creative empowerment. Shopify’s CEO is using optimistic language—“fun discussions,” “brilliant usage of AI,” “100X the work”—to reposition what is effectively a cost-cutting policy as a visionary approach to productivity.
But the underlying message to employees is clear:
Prove your role can’t be automated before asking for help.
That’s not collaboration. It’s competition masquerading as collaboration. AI isn’t being used to augment human potential—it’s being positioned as the metric by which human value is measured. And anyone who’s worked in a large corporation will recognize the pattern: bring in a shiny new system, claim it’s here to assist, then gradually push employees to train it, measure against it, and eventually get displaced by it.
I’ve lived through this before—watching long-time employees told to train third-party contractors who then replaced them. The only difference now is that the contractor has been rebranded as “autonomous AI,” and the pink slips are wrapped in a TED Talk.
The philosophical problem is that workers are now being asked to justify their relevance not on the basis of creativity, judgment, or experience—but on their ability to beat automation at its own game. That’s not a collaborative future. That’s just a new face on the same old race to the bottom.
Re: (Score:2)
May the odds be ever in your favor.
Use AI (Score:3)
The answer is clear: ask AI to write up the justification. If the justification is valid, then the guy shouldn't be fired. If the justification is invalid, then clearly AI could not do the job, so the guy shouldn't be fired.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I know Tobi will weasel out of any negative repercussions but a boy can dream.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see what the problem with the AI answers are: clearly the Alice in question is Alice Cooper.
"Fun" (Score:2)
"This question can lead to really fun discussions and projects."
I'd really like to know this asshat's definition of "fun".
Shouldn't this be all businesses? (Score:1)
Shouldn't this be all businesses? For example, if I had a choice of using Excel versus hiring a guy with a HP-12C, I'd go for Excel. Same if I were choosing between a delivery van versus a rickshaw. If I were building a house, would I want 10 people with hand tools, or a couple people with nailguns? If I were running a farm and could sit in the field with the combine and harvesting trailer doing the work, why would I hire hundreds of laborers to toil in the fields?
Why would I not use AI? It is a power
Re: (Score:2)
Here here.
"CEO asks underlings if they've considered cheaper alternatives before increasing headcount" doesn't quite have the same ring to it as a headline, though.
I've said it before... (Score:2)
So many companies are trying to slash headcount in favour of "AI". Those people who are losing their jobs are, in fact, also customers of the various businesses which are shedding staff. Soon, those companies' actions will result in a lack of people able to pay them for the services and products they offer. Do they not understand that the economy is a cooperative ecosystem, and that when you effectively bankrupt a large part of it the whole thing becomes unsustainable?
Widespread adoption of AI is a race to
Prove that negative (Score:2)
That's right. The burden of proof is on whoever has the lower position in the hierarchy.
Re: (Score:2)
Buddy, must of use here are Full Stack DevOps Site Reliability Engineers. Twenty years ago this would have been thirty different specialties. None of us have gotten 30x pay raises unless we made our own startup to exploit some young idiots fresh out of college.
Re: (Score:2)
"I've seen many of these people approach implausible tasks, ones we wouldn't even have chosen to tackle before, with reflexive and brilliant usage of AI to get 100X the work done," Did the responsible employees also get 100X compensation for their work?
This. And don’t accept bullshit excuses when the fucking whores in Sales just got a 20% commission off a single sale not even remotely worth 100x.
Luigi meet Tobi (Score:2)
Yet another stupid CEO (Score:2)
Until Death Do You Part. Your Employer. (Score:4, Insightful)
"What would this area look like if autonomous AI agents were already part of the team?..This question can lead to really fun discussions and projects."
Abusing premature-AI to dismiss adding headcount is also known as a hiring freeze. A trend that could become rather permanent. Among every other CEO who read the “fun” report from that “exciting” project titled Maximizing CEO Pay and Bonuses through Permanent Hiring Freezes.
As if Greed is any less predictable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That only works to the extent that the company has already hired the best employees that it can. Every business knows that just doesn't happen and why many of them will try to have 5% turnover on a yearly basis. Sometimes standing pat is the best option, but most of the time it's better to discard a few cards and see if you can draw better. The problem too often is that management can't actually tell when it has a good hand or not.
Management is blind because it cares about bottom-line numbers. Not capabilities, personalities, or even human needs. And it doesn’t just care “more” about those bottom-line numbers. It has been found to only care about bottom-line numbers. Hence the #sociopath tag being sometimes accurately associated with CEOs.
Turnover happens most often due to opportunity elsewhere. If the human hiring freeze were to become a greedy addictive trend in business, then the only “turnover”
In other news... (Score:2)
"Candidates must be able to demonstrate the ability draw a human hand with the correct number of fingers and a Rubik's Cube with correct coloring".
Ok (Score:2)
Shopify is already one of the worst POS systems I've ever seen. The only thing worse is anything made by Intuit, though they have recently discontinued their POS in favor of Shopify. Which makes sense, shitty software supporting other shitty software.
CEO should justify his job (Score:2)
https://media.hubspot.com/can-... [hubspot.com]
I weep for the future of corporate America (Score:2)
... actually I fear for the future of all Americans, but that's a much deeper story.
okay, I'm just not using any shopify sites (Score:2)
If you're using shopify to run your store, well, sucks to be use. Choose a better shopping cart vendor.
Really fun discussions (Score:2)
"This question can lead to really fun discussions"
Yeah like what do you do all day, CEO guy, that a chatbot can't do? So far in the last 3 months, Copilot found 1 typo in a code review, wrote a bunch of non-working, not useful unit tests, and told me there is duplicate code somewhere, but couldn't be more specific. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure I could "vibe code" a Pong clone, but that's not me getting 100x the work done.
"I've seen many of these people approach implausible tasks, ones we wouldn't even have
CEObot (Score:2)
Could somebody please make a CEO chatbot that puts out all those reports, motivational talks, generates meeting minutes, investor reports. and pointless memos. At the same pacing. Just feed it some description of the company and what happened today and lets see how much it sounds like a real CEO. Also, it should take many vacation days and golf "meetings" etc.
I bet most can be simulated; including taking credit for ideas of employees (for that it could also decide what ideas to accept - and probably do a
This has to play out some (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But I don't want my post to sound too fateful. I really just mean this is part of the business cycle, not necessarily a tectonic shift. People hang on is all I'm saying.
Justify using people, not AI? Ok (Score:2)
Went through fast food joint the other day, the order was taken by AI.
Much of the order was wrong. Wildly wrong. Sure, that happens with people too. I guess the advantage is that management doesn't have to pay someone to get it wrong.
Oh, at check out - there's still a mandatory tip choice, though 0 is a choice. I consider that if one is dining out and doesn't have money for a tip, you don't have enough money to order - if the position is a tipped position. Fast food is a minimum wage job, not a tip wage. Ti
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not tipping a $7.25 wage job - sorry, not sorry.
Wow, you're a real piece of shit.
That tip doesn't mean anything to you, but it matters a whole lot to someone desperate enough to work full-time for well-below a living wage. Besides, they've more than earned a 35% tip just for putting up with your bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you're a real piece of shit.
I do like watching a full grown person have a melt down like a 4 year old. It's amusing.
The difference being is that one that took the position at $2.13 is counting on tips to make a wage something more than ridiculous.
The person accepting the position at $7.25 knew that was the entire (very ridiculous) wage. Even the local burger chain in my area pays $13 an hour to start, and has options for health insurance. Not entirely paid, but part paid.
Choices have consequences. I thought the right wing was all abou
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you're an even bigger piece of shit than I thought.
You're blaming the victim, dumbass. The problem is 40+ years of stagnant wages, the far-too-low minimum wage, and the horrific exploitation that is the 'tipped wage'.
Re: (Score:2)
To be the victim, someone has to force them to take that job. I'll remind you every state has laws against human trafficking.
I'd almost pay to keep watching you try to troll me. Unfortunately, you're dealing with an mature adult. It's amusing but repetition isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
To be the victim, someone has to force them to take that job.
False. You are clearly far, far, too stupid and uninformed for this "discussion". I'm not surprised. That's typical of giant pieces of shit.
Unfortunately, you're dealing with an mature adult.
False. You're an easily provoked giant piece of shit with the morals to match.
Re: (Score:2)
A minimum wage is not and was never meant to be, a living wage
False [keystoneresearch.org]
Likely algorithm (Score:2)
1. Force-fit task to run on AI
2. AI makes a bigly mess
3. The mess is your justification for hiring a human
4. The new human PROFITS!
enshittification enshittification (Score:1)
how to request additional enshittification without asking for additional enshittification