321–330 of 428 posts
Funny how we learned precisely none of this from that so-called "Facebook whistleblower" two weeks ago. Looking at her Twitter, she doesn't seem to have anything to say about it. How strange! Instead, she's just shilling against encryption: https://nitter.net/FrancesHaugen/status/1452362024856559616
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone reading this on Chrome should switch their browser today. Get off of Gmail while you're at it. There is no perfect alternative, but all those reasons why you think you can't switch don't add up to anything a fraction as bad as what Google is doing.
I have close to 15 years of emails stored in Gmail. Is there an easy way to download that or move it to another provider?
What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, jail sentences. Fines are good but don't work that well, even if they're large, because of agency conflict of interest. It's mostly the shareholders who are paying the price. The execs already saw their call option paid off with their 10 years of comp while they were running this scam (among others).
I agree, even a hefty personal financial fine which pushes people to the verge of bankruptcy will not impress these people. They will get a new high paying job eventually. The only adequate punishment is a long prison sentence and it would deter other people from doing the same. Btw, also send the "reports" IE management who enforces the project straight to prison with the bosses. Sounds radical, maybe, but all the o…
Doesn't sound radical to me; "Give em all long prison sentences" sounds rather authoritarian.
I sometimes wonder, what if there was a universal governing principle, that was simple to enforce, obvious, formulated in few words, so that everyone understands it. All those priveleges which every of theese corporations enjoy, some simple, like not publishing schematic for 1000$+ device, some complex, like making backroom deals harming millions of people in a some insignificant and obscure way daily, like showing c…
Currently, companies have to put the needs of shareholders first above all else. It could be changed through legislation that companies need to put the needs of all *stake*holders first. This would mean chemical companies would have to take into account pollution past what is allowed by regulation, this would mean that Google would have to at least consider the well-being of web users as a whole when making decisions…
The problem is that it's the shareholders who sign off on the CEO, upper management, and their salaries and bonuses. I don't see how you can incentivize people to not put the needs of those who control their paychecks above all else under this model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With about $100b net worth each, I’m going to guess they feel just fine.
That's the thing though. They don't need more money. So why not try to make the world a better place for once? I know they donate to charity but they're uniquely well positioned to influence one of the biggest, and most dangerous, tech company on the planet. I wonder. Do they care? Do they have personal problems that makes the rest seem insignificant? Or do they believe they're truly making the world better?
Funny how we learned precisely none of this from that so-called "Facebook whistleblower" two weeks ago. Looking at her Twitter, she doesn't seem to have anything to say about it. How strange! Instead, she's just shilling against encryption: https://nitter.net/FrancesHaugen/status/1452362024856559616
What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…
I tell everyone about Firefox and uBlock Origin. Blocking YouTube ads is enough of an argument to convince anyone to at least try it out. I've never seen someone who didn't love the ad-free web experience. It's actually safe to just install this software on random computers: people's quality of life will be invisibly yet thoroughly improved, they will notice that things are just better even if they can't explain why.…
What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…
Go into politics.
Yes, that simple. Easy? No. Simple? Yes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their spam detection is true garbage. One year in I had zero actual spams blocked and hundreds of false positives. Unsolicited mail from a direct mailer in India for an SEO webinar, straight to the inbox. Every message from your bank, straight to the spam folder. Am I sure it didn't catch some spam and age it out before I saw it? Yes, because I had to go in every 2-3 weeks to pull my banking messages and other false…
So what you are saying is that they are very good at filtering spam, they just got inbox and junk folders mixed up? ;)