To summarize: they had a happy life until a terrorist group took them during a massacre.
Then they lived a short horrible life in the hands of their takers, while there is a war outside where one side claim to fight to liberate them without actually negociating their release and the other claims to use them as hostages while not really negociating their release either.
And somewhat, they end up dead because let’s be real: neither side gave a f*ck about them.
In these companies, does anyone check the licenses in details to make sure using them is ok for the company?
Meta will get at least the metadata: meaning they will record who was in which call connecting from where.
For example, if one member is visiting a client, Meta may be able to infer the relation between the 2 companies.
If any of the people in the room click “report”, then the discussion is sent for review without the encryption protection
I’m pretty sure their user agreement translates to “you agree to let us do whatever the f*ck we want with the data you’re purposely disclosing to us”.
And last but not least: if Meta decides to wipe the archives, any info get lost?
There a reasons large companies ban unauthorized apps to talk about work.
XMPP is so bad it was the baseline for Whatsapp. You know: that minor platform that feels like IRC and never took off. A lot of the techno around you are old stuff that evolved, “new” techno usually comes with new unexpected issues. Then they mature, get better and… old?
If you do what “they” do as a way to retaliate, are you any different from “them”? We need to be better than that.
At last constant surveillance is deemed a problem, which is why ultra-rich have their privacy protected, while you, peons, keep being monitored.
Unfortunately, you need to add this about all of us supporting them: “buying the cheapest product over buying the fairest produced”, therefore comforting them exploiting labor to reduce the cost is what we collectively want.
So first kill Trump, then kill some of the SC judges, so that they won’t oppose you when you move to make the president bound to uphold the law.
They’re not “defeated”. They got exactly what they wanted. People leaving without having to lay them off through attrition.
Now that they think they have “right-sized” their workforce at no cost, they nicely offer to concede hybrid working to keep the rest of their employees.
Alternative answer: "We understand your issue and will fix it as time and priorities allow. Please note that customers paying for support always get higher priority. Given MS contributions to the project, this ticket was ranked 42nd in our priority list.
Have a pleasant day! FFMPEG support team"
Was he not describing his fundraising as donations so far? You donate money you don’t think you need at all. But you should be able to lend money you don’t need in the near future. I would bet some of his “loyal” supporters would start to doubt if they were asked to lend too much of what they own.
He should borrow vast amounts of money from his loyal supporters: “Empty your lifetime savings accounts, I promise I’ll pay everything back with interests!”.
Then we’ll see how much his followers really trust him when they need to put their own future on the line…
If you can afford a 1M$ painting, you can certainly afford to have it appraised once in a while.
Let’s be real: who would work hard to make ONLY millions instead of billions? Most people would obviously rather stay poor.
I’m sorry if that’s harsh, but my feedback would be: drop that chart!
It’s daunting, it’s going to freak out many newbies. Too much choice kills the choice.
You have one “default” at the bottom, Mint, so stick to that. Tell the newbies they can switch anytime to something else once they’re a bit more comfortable with the Linux-world. And if I’m not mistaken, you can install and try the main DEs with Mint also. Or you can recommend Ubuntu, or any other newbie friendly distro. Just pick one and don’t lose them over what they could see as an important difficult decision before they even get started.
Mozilla downsizes as it refocuses on Firefox and AI drops multiple products and layoff 60 so that its current budget can accomodate the stratospheric compensation of its new CEO.
Half of the job is to fix issues with existing suff, the other half is to make working stuff more complicated and problematic (aka “upgrade”), so that we’re still paid to do the first half.
I kind of hope it’s real. Down that path at some point they’ll decide the whole Internet and all modern technologies are satanist and leave Internet for good. They can embrace the Amish lifestyle, it’s a win for the rest of us.
I use to say “all extremes call for their opposite”. Since almost no information ever transpires about this whole scandal, the opposite is to release all the names to the public. It was to be expected. If we were trusting the justice system, this would seem inappropriate. But we have what we have, and making the whole list public is the only guarantee we have that not one of the “bad” guy can escape public’s attention. That of course, is valid only if the list is comprehensive and some names have not already been taken out.
It is indeed unfortunate that a lot of people who didn’t deserve and didn’t want any bad attention will get some.
I’m not saying I agree with the move. I’m saying it was to be expected.
[Edit made: grammar & missing words]
Scientists have not been hyperbolic. If anything, so far, they've been very cautious abut their statements.
I still remember reading headlines about "likelihood of global warming" then "probably caused by human activities" because 90% level of confidence is not enough, you need more data until you can reach 95% or 98% confidence before boldly writng "most probably".
But in their "probably" they predicted we would see more floods, droughts, violent storms, all of these happening one after the other causing devastation.
And Ô surprise: we see floods, droughts and storms following each other and causing devastation. Yet our leaders will claim "no one could have predicted all of that would happen at once!".
Now they start telling us our civilization could collapse ("could" must be what? 75% confidence level???)
We're going to spend 20-25 years claiming they exagerate, another 20-25 years saying "well, they maybe right, but we can't change things too fast because that would be unreasonable and the people would not accept it".
By the time, we will start reading articles stating no matter what we do now, we can only push out the end a bit, but we're doomed. And the first reactions will be "those damned scientists always exagerate and use hyperboles".
Too bad he failed that close to getting a Darwin award!