401–410 of 562 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iirc google also banned the installation of the zoom client on work devices.
To be honest, that's also because they probably want their employees to use one of their 37 different video-conferencing apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s worth keeping in mind that even though security and ease of use tend to inversely correlate with each other, they are not by default mutually exclusive. I actually disagree with you. I think security and ease of use are mutually exclusive. I can't think of a single counterexample where security did not have an effect on usability. Now to be clear, I absolutely believe we should have a lot more security than we…
[flagged]
That phenomenon gets stronger the less-known the truth is, because people will more readily look for reasons to reject a contrarian/minority view than a familiar one. It's important not to supply spurious such reasons, and that means articulating the truth (or what you believe is true) in a way that avoids gratuitous admixtures.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume you're getting downvoted because you don't seem to take issue with censorship of free speech ultimately being a problem, and why people take stand against tyrants?
I've got no idea. I literally said I don't personally like it, so obviously I do take issue. But there's no scandal with Zoom in this particular case. And this certainly isn't anything new about China. Why people are downvoting something so factual is beyond me. You'll have to ask them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. Just a week ago, Facebook employees went on strike because FB refused to censor Trump’s messaging. NYT reporters forced the opinion editor to resign for allowing a Republican senator to publish an op-ed. Meanwhile, I’ll bet many of those same people consider censorship of Tiananmen Square to be wrong. Apparently, there is good censorship, and bad censorship. What’s frustrating is that the proponents of “go…
> NYT reporters forced the opinion editor to resign for allowing a Republican senator to publish an op-ed. That is quite a naive interpretation. It's not like the Times Opinion pages have never seen a Republican op-ed. The issue is that the op-ed in question advocated for violence against American citizens based on factual errors and flimsy premises.
It’s an opinion section, and labeled as such. The NYT explicitly does not endorse its content, nor do they designate it as “factual“ reporting. The idea that reporters revolted and the editor of it resigned because a mob disagreed with an opinion in it, seems farcical given that the purpose of such a section is to present opinions opposite those of the editorial board (literally, op-ed).
If it’s full of “factual errors and flimsy premises,” surely NYT readers are smart enough to decide that for themselves. If not, surely the NYT can solicit an opinion from an opposing viewpoint to rebut those “errors.”
It’s not like he is some radical with no voice; he’s an elected senator, and could choose to publish in any number of periodicals. The NYT isn’t “giving him a voice”; he already has one.
This kind of thing is the exact reason why I was disturbed by the Keybase.io sale to Zoom and abandoned my account. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23105253 ) I've been currently using Zoom during the pandemic because as a product it's still the best (and I signed up for a discounted year of pro), but I won't give them any money again.
Tesla canceled Zoom due to these privacy concerns expressed in this article. We use Microsoft Teams now and it's much better. Everyone already used it as an instant messenger before this and since it's part of the Outlook ecosystem i've found that it's much better. It's also saved a ton of useless meetings that run really long because i can just call someone straight through Teams instead of setting a meeting.
It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.
There is a vast difference between letting the government suppress speech, which is what China does, and letting private companies suppress speech, which is what happens in America. When the government does it, you can't express that idea anywhere. When private companies do it, you can still express those ideas somewhere else.
So there is a difference, but I don't think it's 'vast'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US citizens have a significant better chance at fighting a warrant. Personally, we've been using Jitsi for video. It's not amazing, but it is free in many senses of the word.
Two comments recommending Jitsi. Suspicious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason I'm not using Google Meet is because there's no guarantee about the continuity of the service a few years down the road. I think it's a reasonable fear about every Google product (except for search, gmail, and YT). I don't wanna rely on a service that gets discontinued by Google just like their other popular products e.g. Reader, Plus, Glass, etc.
what does that matter now? its not that there is a high cost of switching...
I was on the team that chose zoom (which I now have reservations about, but that horse has bolted).
During the initial discussions, Google dropping products was brought up and was our primary reason for not picking their product.
After all his morale handwringing about working for Facebook, he is now working for Zoom, a Chinese Communist Party spy operation. Not only does he work for them, his job is to shill them so that people trust them.
He should feel ashamed of himself and really makes his whole situation with Facebook seem quite silly. He is now actually working for the 'bad guys'