deweydecibel

Are Microsoft a big, evil company?

A. No, that’s insanely reductive. They’re super smart people, and sometimes super smart people make mistakes. What matters is what they do with knowledge of mistakes.

I have no doubt there are smart employees, but they don’t call the shots. Case in point.

The dude set up a strawman argument, then didn’t even bother to burn it down properly.

If you need to use parentheses to explain the joke, you failed at telling the joke.

The whole point with these sorts of memes is they’re supposed to be relatable enough and easy enough to grasp with the added context of the image.

It is shocking because they did it after the investigation had started, which is monumentally stupid.

You can destroy any records you want at any time, unless there’s an investigation underway or you have good reason to believe one will be starting. At that point, you’re destroying evidence.

Too many “I like to tinker more than I like my software to work” options

I fail to see how this is a problem. What are you suggesting here? Eliminate all those options so it looks nicer?

Legitimately, what makes New Outlook so fucking awful is that they did exactly this. They cut out half of the actual usability, options, and functionality of Outlook to make a “clean, lightweight experience”. And it’s objectively terrible as a replacement.

This sentiment that software needs to get dumber because people can’t stand having to look at a bunch of options can seriously die in a fire.

They’re also evidence of why the book banning doesn’t really work as well today as conservatives would like it to.

Book banning was an effective way of controlling what your young population was exposed to before the internet and social media. It worked best when the young weren’t even aware of the information they were being denied.

But social media is making sure they’re all very much aware of what has been hidden from them. They know what’s going on. You will find teenagers in particular are kind of resistant to being told no by an authority, so they’re going to do something about it.

Now, don’t feel too excited about this, because there’s a threat here. Every single time you see a conservative talking about more stringent age verification for things on the internet, part of what they’re actually trying to do is create an avenue to control the information kids are exposed to. They are pretty open about how LGBT issues, particularly the T ones, can be labeled as “sexual” and “inappropriate”. With very simple changes to the regulation, they can suppress children’s access to anything they like as long as they make a half-assed argument that it’s “inappropriate”.