If this man was in role for 5 years and performing and rising in both pay and title whilst doing the job function, I am hesitant to believe this is serious. No, you shouldn't do that, but in kind he did the job, he was doing the job. This feels more like the wrong person found out and was jealous and outed him, and the company "fealt" like he should somehow pay for it.

Someone stop that giant dick, look at the dwindling populations across the world, observe the food insecurity and mass wage inequality and then take your talking points and stick them up your bum. We need global reform to force living wages and less working hours. We've rushed ahead for capitalism at the expense of our sanity, our freedom, and our planet and it needs to stop.

I think the curtain is coming down tbh. People who work full time are now recognizing that "capitalism" doesn't mean you all benefit from the success of a company, it means no matter how much time, effort, or profit you earn for a company they will never push that gain to the workers, not you as an individual, not your team as a whole. And people are frankly sick of hearing about how much money Y company made and how much the CEO was paid. These boasts of hoarding and inadequate wealth distribution are causing people to say no thank-you. And I hope that we can as a global community find something that works better for us all.

Teams has been garbage for some time, but let's face the music here, we use it and suffer through their guinea pigging us because of corporate decisions. However this will change in the next year the moment MS pulls the plug and switches windows to a subscription model to fall in line with AI and the o365 framework. I'm personally excited for this as Teams constantly hangs, can't be trusted to run for 24 hours without chewing all the cpu and ram, and constantly eats it. I spend the first 2 minutes of every meeting trying to get audio to function.

This is debated as a basic human right across the globe. I don't agree nor do I like this not being funded and addressed, but in kind would prefer to have better equity across the board, not just a penny to allow you to rant on the internet, for them to withdraw such a meager effort and not replace it with something more substantive and impactful is really a shame.

When I was little my siblings and father used to get me to test 9v batteries by putting the posts on my tongue... how far we've come.

I think it was Penn and Teller that outlined this many years ago. Yes it felt good for a time, but now It's blatently obvious that the entire plastic industry at a minimum is full of poopies. What's really bothersome is now that coroporations have won and own gov't, regulations, etc etc we have only to beg them not to keep killing us and destroying the planet... we know how well that's been going. There's no oversight, no regulatory body that will meaningfully step in and put a foot down to actuallly regulate this. They might go in there under an "appease the masses" and charge someone 20 million, when profits are in the Billions... I don't think it's going to change, I think we're F(*&ed, sorry.

What this fails to highlight directly is: * The vast majority of the populous have abandoned twitter, it's dead. * Grok is garbage, that's like offering someone the leftovers from your compost bin if they pay you a 16.00 cover fee * Elon is upset because he tried to brow-beat them into selling to Tesla in the early days * Elon was on the board, he left after the previous point fell flat * Elon is still in debt after promising to provide them startup capital from when he was on the board.

The fact that the govt(at least in canada) paid a private firm for encryption software for radio's tells me what I need to know. Encryption should not be inherently or intentionally back-doored. I believe that's their problem with this. They know it's open and fair use and that they cannot break it. However I respect that a level of transparency is required when dealing with legal matters; I don't think the process to obtain information is well documented or public enough, and should likely be reviewed by the people and professionals alike to ensure it's fair to the public and in-line with the law.

I think this is weak and likely politically charged decision. If you want to impact children regulate advertising for starters, be more like the UK and don't allow any advertising to be pushed on children. That action alone would bring companies like google, apple, and MS more in-line and under regulation by the govt in contrast to blocking only certain content on social platforms. or the better option, do both!

Oh no, you mean the kids that are worried about getting shot every-day, most malnourished, who are looking at their parents and other adults and wondering if that's really the future they want with the stress and inequality aren't hyper-fixated on education? not even from the starving adults who are wildly under-funded and living the same nightmare? I can't imagine why they aren't doing well.

This is directly in line with pushes of advertising, commercials, price increases in contrast to YT, where you can still directly block adverts. I'm confident when a more altruistic company shows up they will all flock there. we need more competition

two points. 1. this isn't new, I mean it's great you can do the thing, but it's not new. 2. apple is still pushing out of the box usb-c at a top speed of 480mbps... yes the pro has usb-c 3.0 with up to 10 gbps, but ship it with a 2.0 cable. I personally find it so frustrating how gated manufacturers of everything have become, just trying to get extra pennies with palms out; and no this isn't just an apple thing, but I would be thrilled if they would take the lead and stop doing it.

It's the adage being sold though. The auto industry has people thinking the same thing, You pay for insurance, get in a situation where it should be a phone-call to use the thing you're paying for, get retaliatory treatment in the form of increased rates for x or y. And people talk, and now it's an oddity to read how this mentality has invaded insurance.... on space stuff!!! wtaf

I recognize that the concept here is that you offer it as "unlimited" with the expectation of something like "all you can eat", where no single person has the capacity to bankrupt the system by consuming all of your food forever... storage isn't food, I hope moving forward they learn that the "all you can eat" model doesn't work for storage. I do wonder however what these people are going to do with excess information stored there? 5TB is a lot of information, I'd have a hard time finding a home for that. A similar thing occurred with a mobile carrier in the early days that offered the "all you could eat" package, only to have a person turn on a hotspot, add some cooling and persistent power to the mobile device, and then proceed to see how much data could actually be pushed. They weren't able to turn the user off and had to make a settlement to stop the bleeding.