So, I got this S6 and A3 (2016 model) standing in my desk. They both are asking me to update Samsung Games Service in a persistent notification (can't dismiss). Take a guess at the amazing options I got: "Later" and "Update". FCK YEAH. And this is their "Games Service" - you don't even get a notification for their "Samsung Apps" app (you know, their stupid market). You can't freeze/disable/uninstall any of these apps in a recent, bootloader-FULLY-LOCKED Sammy phone. You might argue "but hey, you're not using them, you just have them installed!", to which I say: you go tell that to the millions of Koreans tuned in at their launch events seeing stupid, cherry-picked market statistics which say "999999 MILLION PEOPLE USED THESE LAST YEAR AND SO SHOULD YOU". Chances are that thing is gonna get a lot of traction from now on, for no actual decent reason at all, other than a great marketing strategy. Who is your god now?
Other companies you heard also do this kind of product promotion through BS stats: Apple, Google, and... Microsoft. Trust me, when you're the market leader on anything (and Samsung is, in the mobile department), you WILL push whatever you want to people. They just don't want to push this because they didn't see the bucks coming in the way they wanted (which is to say: it probably didn't scale well enough to be as profitable as other services that actually make it outside S. Korea).
If they really wanted you to eat that crappy music service, they would make it work. Just like Spotify is making people eat their 8-bucks subscription service even though can get everything they need for free or really really cheap (e.g. by faking a "family"). Tech companies are not THAT stupid.
I've been dwelling the past months in my team's will to go full-fledged MVC (actually MVP) while developing for the Android SDK (for those out of topic: making apps). I see peers and myself struggling with old, large activities, running laps around to make them pass "technical debt" code reviews intending to "make them more future proof".
It would be nice and all if I could grasp the benefits, but the problem is three-fold:
a) the team is fooling themselves and the company into spending too much resources in something they can't assure adds value;
b) Android already has a very solid MVP-like pattern going on, and MVP-ing it up further is a clear case of overengineering
c) most important of all: there is no actual standard to guide the team, so it's a free for all and I see all the initial benefits down the drain just because everybody tastes a different flavour of the view/presenter combo
And I see and underlying problem which might even be more crucial: the app will likely be dropped before reaping the long-term benefits, turning the entire endeavor TOTALLY WORTHLESS. So what I'm trying to say is: you got a solid framework with great patterns put in place already, developed by a company that is on the tech top 10, and you decide to be all trendy around it? You're pretty much grinding for a promotion you definitely don't deserve, because you're making that framework worse for everybody that you manage.
Anti-deuchebaggerism is actually what needs global attention.
The elimination of hypocrisy must take precedence over the patching of other societal problems, because that's what the "fight against message encryption" is just that: a patch to the failures of internal security. The real problem is what causes this terrorism, and while most people think closing borders is the solution, it is just another patch to another failure. The thing that both these have the most in common isn't actually the fact they are both patches, but that they are both killing much more important things than the possibility of there being bombs or killing: they are taking away freedoms of privacy, safe-haven/asylum, or even freedom of speech. They are, and sorry to be cliché in advance, turning developed democracies into a 1984-esque states.
France, the U.S. and the rest of Europe need to dive deep into their consciousness and create solutions for the real problem - solutions that tackle directly the radicalism problem rather than attempt to generalize it to any and all dark-skinned foreigners, or even the entirety of people inside a country. They need to help Syria get their stuff sorted out and they need to stand besides the more civilized party of that conflict. They need to do exactly what Russia is doing but with a better partner than one that is stoic to the use of chlorine, because, you know, chemical attacks are just a bit harder to target specifically to your enemies (i.e. to avoid killing innocents). And yes, there is no actual good party involved in a war like Syria has, but you need to pick the BETTER one, educate it, and instruct it during and after the conflict.
"But you want to start a war to solve a problem that can easily be solved by me not having an encrypted app or not letting Muslims in?" Yeap: For starters, losing privacy and freedom might not sound like much now, but a lot of people died in the past for us to have what we have now. If you think being less free solves anything you're flat out wrong. And secondly, the war has already started. The main point here is: states need to act in accordance to their own standards. Lowering the standards to suit one's own transient needs is the same as printing money or lending banks money to avoid default - it has been proven wrong in the long term and to setting precedents that are way to hard to roll back.