When you grow up to be an adult, you will understand that "objectivity"is a fiction.
And an encyclopedia can absolutely do that and still present factual information based on actual research and facts.
You know that just because a lady has blue hair or a person has colored skin does NOT mean that they can't be right about something or do good research. Right? You do know it, right?
Because in the end, when you cry about DEI (whatever you believe it to mean), this is the implication that comes with it: that you can't imagine for a second that anyone who doesn't look exactly like you could ever do anything competently. I genuinely wonder if you've ever thought about that for more than half a second after you closed that Charlie Kirk video.
If you do believe it, fair enough. I guess you're allowed to believe it. But at least be honest about it.
I really don't mean to be rude but you sound insane. You have spent too much time in whatever insulated twitter space you're in, and you've ended up sounding like an insane person! Please go do independent research on these topics, so you can try not saying things like "DEI virtue signaling white knights". You just strung together 3 separate buzzwords (buzzphrase?)
I wonder if something called "context" and the socio-economic direction might have something to do with it.
"I think we gotta hand it to Apartheid because schools were very slightly less worse" isn't the argument you think it is. It does paint where you stand quite clearly.
Never start a sentence with "I'm no apartheid apologist, but". Nothing good can ever come out of it.
So by your logic the people of the german democratic republic weren’t oppressed because they got free education and proper wages. I think the citizens saw that differently.
You could make smart inferences based on past and very frequent occurrences.
Or you could just say "there is no way the thing that constantly happens over and over again has happened once again, just no way".
Staff cuts constantly happen in the name of maximising profits. They always yield poor results for a company's performance. Every time. Especially for the consumer's side of it (not the company's finances of course).
Every time.
But maybe this time it's different. That one time.
The whole "we have only received two emails" is a classic move of every company caught with their pants down. Considering Proton's history, they don't get the benefit of the doubt on this one.
As for the "company size excuse" sorry but considering the business you claim to be in (the private and secure email), having an on-call skeleton crew legal team available over the weekend for urgent requests is a bare minimum (and I'm pretty sure they have people available to hand over everything the cops request if "the proper process is followed").
Remember that they have turned over information in less than 24 hours before (for what they call an extreme case of course). So the "size" excuse doesn't hold. Doesn't matter how urgent it is, if they are the small bean they claim they are, there is no chance they can have a turnaround of less than 24 hours.
Again, it's not what they did that's the biggest issue, it's the coverup. Just like last time they got in hot water. Because the coverup raises a lot more questions.
If you don't have enough people to run your business you're doing it wrong. If you don't have enough money to hire people for your business, it's not a viable business.
> having an on-call skeleton crew legal team available over the weekend for urgent requests is a bare minimum
I don't know about Switzerland, but in Germany, no company will be available "over the weekend". Almost everything on the internet in DE is Mo-Fr 9-17.
The only cloud storage that has a decent Linux client is Dropbox.
Koofr is a decent cloud solution. Their client is horrendous across all platforms and lacks the most basic functionalities.
You can argue OneDrive / GoogleDrive are semi decent if you also use insync, which adds another license to purchase when a basic client should come free with the service you've already bought.
And no, rsync doesn't come even close to it in terms of functionality/simplicity, no matter how much hardened Linux users who haven't been outside since 1988 are trying to convince everyone otherwise.
Here is the thing: Dropbox has no business being anything other than a cloud storage solution. Stop trying to do everything, it's too difficult and too expensive. Find what you're great at, and just improve it little by little. Stop adding shit.
Never, ever used any additional Dropbox services. All I need it to do is be a reliable cloud storage. Nothing else.
Lower the price below Google Drive and be better at being Google Drive than Google is. It wouldn't be that hard. You wouldn't need to be more expensive if you weren't pissing money away on acquisitions no one wants all the time.
ah yes, make your product cheaper than the same thing from company that has the greatest number of free software offerings with the largest user bases in the world
The changelog states: "Added support for “differential” uploads. When large files are edited, Drive for desktop will now upload only the parts of the file that changed."
Okay, but let's say Google implements that. Than Dropbox is toast, right?
It's such a shame, because I absolutely believe that simpler products which focus on one thing and do it well are basically always a better user experience (and I personally try to use them wherever possible). But I think the business case is hard.
You have no business telling anyone what their business is. Dropbox has "business" doing whatever they want to try to make great products, achieve their mission and turn over some cash.
And an encyclopedia can absolutely do that and still present factual information based on actual research and facts.
You know that just because a lady has blue hair or a person has colored skin does NOT mean that they can't be right about something or do good research. Right? You do know it, right?
Because in the end, when you cry about DEI (whatever you believe it to mean), this is the implication that comes with it: that you can't imagine for a second that anyone who doesn't look exactly like you could ever do anything competently. I genuinely wonder if you've ever thought about that for more than half a second after you closed that Charlie Kirk video.
If you do believe it, fair enough. I guess you're allowed to believe it. But at least be honest about it.