Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 353 posts

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#191

Post by hathawsh »

spectramax wrote: post #140
bovermyer wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm both wary of and hopeful about Microsoft and Google. "Trust but verify" and all that.

I’ve always found this phrase an oxymoron.

You're correct: an oxymoron is a phrase that is seemingly self-contradictory. While "trust but verify" is an oxymoron, it is not a contradiction or paradox.

A simpler oxymoron is "to make haste slowly". In that phrase, the "make haste" part describes velocity, while "slowly" describes acceleration. Anyone who has taken Calculus knows that velocity and acceleration can be independent variables. Thus "to make haste slowly" is an oxymoron but not self-contradictory.

Similarly, "trust but verify" describes two possibly independent variables: your attitude about the future and your behavior regarding the past. You can choose to trust people to make good decisions for the future, while simultaneously verifying they made good decisions in the past. Alternatives to "trust but verify" include "always trust", which has obvious bad consequences; "never trust", which has different but also bad consequences; "trust sometimes", which is ambiguous; and "verify always", which is unrealistic. The phrase "trust but verify" describes a healthy attitude and behavior.

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#192

Post by Stratoscope »

GuiA wrote: post #177
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's funny that 15 years back I was so anti MS and pro Google and now I think it's the other way! You should be pro-neither. Microsoft used to be against FOSS because they thought it would make them more money; Microsoft is currently friendlier to FOSS because they think it will make them more money. Does that make them bad people? No because all businesses are that way, even the vaunted "don't be evil" Google.

Being pro/anti specific companies in a very binary way, like you point out, is a false path. However, placing all companies in the same bucket is committing a similar mistake. There is definitely a “gradient of morality” amongst companies, despite all of them doing things because they think it is what will make them the most money in the long run. A company building products that end up aiding the carrying out of gen…

> A company building products that end up aiding the carrying out of genocides, for instance, is clearly on a more extreme end of the spectrum...

Couldn't that describe just about any company or open source project?

A database and office software end up helping you manage and track your genocide.

A camera company's products and photo/video editing software end up helping people create beheading videos and child porn.

When we create a general purpose product and release it to the world, we lose control of who uses it and for what purposes. In fact, that is a specific requirement for free and open source software licenses.

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#193

Post by partiallypro »

scarface74 wrote: post #168
partiallypro wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is AWS's core weakness going forward...they compete with their own cloud customers. From video streaming, to online shopping, to groceries, to logistics...why would I (as a business consumer) want to fund my own competition? Azure competes with none of its own customers, outside of perhaps AI. Amazon is AWS's biggest enemy. Azure and GCS are going to catch up on features, and customers are going to start fleeing…

GCP may catch up on “features” but with Google’s horrible reputation for both poor customer support, and abandoning products, any decision maker should have second thoughts on choosing GCP over AWS or Azure.

I don't disagree, I think Google will suffer in the Cloud game because of their reputation to 180 and kill products. But I do think they will continue to gain ground in both customers and features. As I said though, Azure will likely benefit the most. The main reason Google will remain in the race...imo is because there is still a deeply seeded hatred of Microsoft amount a big enough part of the community.

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#194

Post by rurp »

TheIronYuppie wrote: post #110
spectramax wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is telemetry built into VS Code that you can turn off, but it is turned on by default. There is no way to know how they're using that data. Microsoft also collects data on Office365 platform and even local Office 2019 installs. I was trying was to make a tongue in cheek point, rather than specifically digging into exact methods of how they collect data. You may be right but it is besides the core issue we are d…

We don't do any training on your data. Telemetry is largely for feature use tracking (eg we should really do better around this component, everyone is using it). There is absolutely no ads overlap at all. Literally none. Disclosure: I work at Azure but not on VS Code

A big tech company harvesting extensive user data by default and saying it's ok because "Trust us, we don't do anything bad with it" is not a compelling argument these days. Even if it's true (and that's a big if), that says nothing about what Microsoft will do with the data tomorrow, or the next day.

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#195

Post by scarejunba »

stupidcar wrote: post #188
scarejunba wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trust part is me trusting you to want to do the right thing. The verify part is me checking that nothing went wrong - either through a mistake on your part, a misunderstanding on mine, or just the signal loss from the fact that human communication is imperfect.

You've just restated the original post and ignored my question. Again: how does this definition of supposed trust differ from distrust in any verifiable way?

It affects our interaction. Because I assume you'll act in good faith, I only add verification in the range of errors not in the range of malice.

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#196

Post by [deleted] »

apetresc wrote: post #172
bovermyer wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where humans are involved, mistakes will happen. Trusting someone but verifying their work is a safe and sane pairing.

But the whole point of trusting is that you get to skip verifying. What's the difference between trusting and not trusting if you still have to put in the work of verification anyway?

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#197

Post by stupidcar »

rotrux wrote: post #190
stupidcar wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is verifying everything because you don't trust people not to make a mistake operationally different from verifying everything because you suspect bad faith? To the supposed trusted party, the result is the same: you not taking them at their word and instead checking whatever they do. Even if you're being honest about only verifying to avoid mistakes, you can never prove it. This definition of "trust but verify"…

There are different kinds and levels of trust. "Trust but verify" doesn't mean you should give strangers your SSN. I agree that this nuance is lost within the turn-of-phrase, but omitting the trust part doesn't seem to me like a good way to build a collaborative society. Companies are just people.

Yes, of course trust is a spectrum, and socially important, etc. But none of that answers my question: In the case of "trust but verify", how does this trust manifest in a provable way?

Consider it like this: For me, trust is feelings/thoughts. I might trust you a little, a lot, etc. But for you, my trust can only be demonstrated by my actions, because you can't peer inside my head and tell whether I'm genuinely trust you, or I'm only claiming to.

"Trust but verify" recommends adopting a mindset of trust but a pattern of behaviour externally indistinguishable from distrust. If I'm verifying everything you do, that does't signal trust, whatever the reasons I might give for it.

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#198

Post by spectramax »

hathawsh wrote: post #191
spectramax wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve always found this phrase an oxymoron.

You're correct: an oxymoron is a phrase that is seemingly self-contradictory. While "trust but verify" is an oxymoron, it is not a contradiction or paradox. A simpler oxymoron is "to make haste slowly". In that phrase, the "make haste" part describes velocity, while "slowly" describes acceleration. Anyone who has taken Calculus knows that velocity and acceleration can be independent variables. Thus "to make haste slo…

I wasn't 100% sure if I chose the correct term, thanks for the explanation!

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#199

Post by maxxxxx »

bovermyer wrote: post #127
maxxxxx wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“It's funny that 15 years back I was so anti MS and pro Google and now I think it's the other way!” Stay skeptical of all of them. No need to be fan of one of the big techs. In the end they are all greedy organizations that want to dominate. None of them should be trusted.

I'm both wary of and hopeful about Microsoft and Google. "Trust but verify" and all that.

"Vertrauen ist gut, Kontrolle ist besser" for the Germans here :-)

Re: Microsoft, currently the most valuable company, is having a Nadellaissance

#200

Post by spectramax »

AdamTReineke wrote: post #165
komali2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a way we can see what data specifically is being sent to your servers from our local VSCode installations?

(Disclaimer, work at Microsoft. Not on VS Code.) I expect you should be able to run Fiddler or Wireshark or similar traffic sniffers to see the requests.

I presume these requests are encrypted? So, it is hard to know what exactly is being sent.
Post reply on HN