Ollama Enshittification - the Early Signs

My view on current state of Ollama development

Page content

Ollama has quickly become one of the most popular tools for running LLMs locally. Its simple CLI, and streamlined model management have made it a go-to option for developers who want to work with AI models outside the cloud. But as with many promising platforms, there are already signs of Enshittification:

  • the gradual process by which software or services degrade over time, as user interests are slowly subordinated to business, architectural, or other internal priorities.

enshittification and decay

In this article, I’ll explore recent trends and user complaints around Ollama that hint at this drift, and why they matter for its future.

For the details of the most frequent Ollama commands and parameters - please see Ollama cheatsheet.

For useful UIs for Ollama see - Open-Source Chat UIs for LLMs on Local Ollama Instances

Auto-Start and Background Control

One of the clearest pain points reported by users is Ollama auto-starting on system boot — particularly on Windows.

  • There is no clear setting to disable this behavior.
  • Even if you manually disable it, updates or reinstalls may silently re-enable startup.
  • On macOS, the desktop app also defaults to launching at login, unless you specifically install the CLI-only variant.

This pattern — software inserting itself into your startup routine without explicit consent — is a classic red flag. It erodes user trust and creates friction for those who value control over their system.

Telemetry and Data Collection Concerns

Another recurring issue is Ollama’s network behavior. Users have noticed outgoing traffic even when all operations should be local. The maintainers have stated this is tied to update checks, not user inputs — but there’s no simple toggle for those who want a strictly offline experience.

For a platform that markets itself as a local, privacy-first tool, this lack of clarity creates doubt. Transparency and opt-out options are essential if Ollama wants to maintain credibility.

Performance Regressions with the New Engine

Recent updates introduced a new inference engine, but instead of performance improvements, some users have reported the opposite:

  • Token generation is up to 10× slower in certain scenarios.
  • GPU utilization is inconsistent compared to the previous engine.
  • Larger models like Qwen3:30B now run significantly worse, with higher latency and lower throughput.

This shift raises concerns about priorities. If updates make models less usable on real hardware, developers may feel pressured to upgrade hardware or accept degraded performance — another subtle way user experience is deprioritized.

Security Risks from Misconfigured Instances

Security researchers have found exposed Ollama servers running without authentication. Vulnerabilities like path traversal and denial-of-service vectors have been disclosed, with some patched and others disputed.

While much of this falls on users misconfiguring deployments, the lack of secure defaults increases risk. A platform’s responsibility includes making the safe path the easy path.

Turbo: Monetization and Business Model Shifts

The launch of Ollama Turbo — a cloud acceleration service — represented a pivotal moment. Ollama’s original differentiation was its focus on local control, privacy, and open-source distribution. Turbo, however, introduces a dependency on Ollama’s own infrastructure.

  • Using Turbo requires a sign-in, shifting away from the zero-friction local-first experience.
  • Key features in the Mac app now depend on Ollama’s servers, raising concerns about how much functionality may remain usable offline.
  • Discussions on Hacker News framed this as the beginning of enshittification, warning that commercialization could eventually introduce paywalls for capabilities that are currently free.

This doesn’t mean Ollama has abandoned its principles — Turbo can be valuable for users who want faster inference without buying new hardware. But the optics matter: once a local-first tool requires centralized services for “the best” experience, it risks diluting the very qualities that made it stand out from OpenAI or Anthropic in the first place.

The Pattern: User Control vs. Vendor Defaults

Individually, these issues might seem small. Together, they suggest a pattern:

  • Startup behavior defaults to on, not off.
  • Update checks happen automatically, not opt-in.
  • Performance changes serve new architectural goals, even if they degrade current usability.
  • Monetization now introduces server dependency, not just local binaries.

This is how enshittification begins — not with a single hostile move, but with a series of small shifts that subtly trade user control for vendor convenience or revenue.

What Hasn’t Happened (Yet)

To be fair, Ollama has not yet crossed into the most egregious territory:

  • No ads or promotions inside the UI.
  • No aggressive paywalls limiting core local functionality.
  • No hard lock-in around proprietary formats; community models remain accessible.

That said, vigilance is warranted. The shift from “a tool that respects your control” to “a tool that does what the vendor wants by default” often happens gradually.

city enshittification trend

Conclusion

Ollama remains one of the best ways to run large models locally. But the early signs are clear: auto-start behavior, telemetry opacity, performance regressions, insecure defaults, and the cloud-first drift of Turbo all hint at a slow move away from the tool’s original ethos.

For Ollama to stay true to its promise, the maintainers need to prioritize transparency, opt-in design, and local-first principles. Otherwise, the platform risks undermining the very values that made it appealing in the first place. But I don’t hold the breath.