Edit: I guess it wasn't sufficiently clear, the second sentence here is not my own personal opinion.
Edit: I guess it wasn't sufficiently clear, the second sentence here is not my own personal opinion.
Distortion-fields aren't so powerful that they cause people with integrity to discount critical thinking. If someone can be sold on this with hand-waving, they probably lacked integrity or critical thinking from the start.
I have two reactions to this:
1. I absolutely HATE this kind of arrogance from companies.
2. I don't believe them. I think it's far more likely they are doing this to juice their metrics, rather than honestly thinking that taking away options will make everyone like them more.
Nonsense explanation means just that users' interests were not factored in the decision.
FWIW, here in Sweden I can still look at feeds without being logged in.
As someone who's been writing integration (not nefarious!) scrapers for years, this is crap. Email accounts are free, VPNs and captcha solvers are dirt-cheap and at the end of the day, if they screw up the web version too much, the mobile apps are even easier to turn into scrapers as they usually use some kind of JSON API.
They did this for the same reason as Reddit and Facebook: - it's harder to make ad profiles for anonymous users - new users is a metric that investors love - psychological trick (I can't remember what that specific phenomenon is called) to turn lurkers into posters