I meant more like, that’s the best accolade you may get as someone working for McDonald’s. But yes, McDonald’s absolutely has a reason to support the status quo in terms of corporate rule.

Yes, because they’re not funny, but if I get in the habit of laughing at them myself, someone nearby may not be paying attention and laugh along with me.

That should work, as soon as I have friends to be around me

Employee of the Month

100% agree. Leave the people who would work the best at home at home. You want to play the corporate game? Come to the office.

You will arguably get better results in terms of your product.

I had a 14.4 modem. I remember wanting a 33.6. Those were the days though. Simpler times.

I’ve never understood why it isn’t the other way around.

All the higher up corpos can be together in the office. After all, they seem to enjoy playing around in suits.

Yep, I went to Mastodon too.

It’s very upsetting that the way most people know about federated platforms is Meta’s Threads.

You’d be surprised how many Windows-only games run better on Linux+Proton than on Windows itself. There is far less system overhead on Linux.

Coupled with the standards too: Linux tends to be more secure, it’s free, you have more choices, etc etc. I switched both of my gaming rigs to Linux a few years ago and never looked back.

Reddit was reddit. I left when I was forced into using their stupid app and watch ads.

I’ve generally enjoyed Lemmy.

Edit: or to and

If you’re a corpo, not integrating generative AI somewhere is seen as a misstep. Shareholders want to know that their money is being used on the cutting edge.

Of course, both groups are clueless as to where generative AI may actually be useful. But ultimately it doesn’t matter.

8 kbps should be enough for anyone

deleted by creator

Linux. I use Pop on my desktop and Arch on my laptop.

BTW, Linux+Proton is great for playing Windows-only games. The time for needing Windows for gaming is mostly past, tbh. You may often find better performance on Linux for many games, too.

And given the speed at which China generally is able to carry things out, I don’t think it will take long at all until we see true parity between Chinese chips and their US-based counterparts.

I’m not suggesting that Signal is any better. I’m supporting absolute distrust until such information is available.

It would require thousands if not tens of thousands of Google semployees coordinating in utter secrecy

This is usually used for things like the Moon Landing, where so many folks worked for NASA to make it entirely impossible that the landing was faked.

But it doesn’t really apply here. We know for example that NSA backdoors exist in Windows. Were those a concerted effort by MS employees? Does everyone working on the project have access to every part of the code?

It just isn’t how development works at this scale.

Exactly. We know corporations regularly use marketing and doublespeak to avoid the fact that they operate for their interests and their interests alone. Again, the interests of corporations are not altruistic, regardless of the imahe they may want to support.

Why should we trust them to “innovate” without independent audit?

You are missing my point.

I don’t deny the definition of E2EE. What I question is whether or not RCS does in fact meet the standard.

You provided a link from Google itself as verification. That is… not useful.

Has there been an independent audit on RCS? Why or why not?

This. Distrust in corporations is healthy regardless of what they claim.

You are suggesting that “end-to-end” is some kind of legally codified phrase. It just isn’t. If Google were to steal data from a system claiming to be end-to-end encrypted, no one would be surprised.

I think your point is: if that were the case, the messages wouldn’t have been end-to-end encrypted, by definition. Which is fine. I’m saying we shouldn’t trust a giant corporation making money off of selling personal data that it actually is end-to-end encrypted.

By the same token, don’t trust Microsoft when they say Windows is secure.