greggoB

> A company like Proton lives and dies by its reputation, trust, and goodwill.

This is essentially what I wrote in the "reason for leaving" comment box when I cancelled my annual subscription. I'm sure many others have/will as well; I'm less sure Proton will course-correct before it's too late.

Thanks for sharing, I was hoping there was a way to hear from them about this directly (I'm also not impressed).

As much as I want to argue against, the evidence is pretty clear that your point applies to a significant proportion of people :/

While the article is light on details and so at risk of getting ahead of things, what concerns me is the incentives this creates for said employees.

In addition to that, it possibly highlights a worry about where Proton's priorities are - as a paying customer of a secure email service, should I be concerned that that part of them business is increasingly paying second-fiddle?

Indeed. What's been most interesting (for me) wrt LLMs is how they've exposed these incredibly warped perspectives. I'm not sure what more to make of it beyond noticing it though.

I'm really getting tired of this argument. Yes, mess existed before everyone could 10x everything with AI. No, that doesn't mean there's somehow no difference between now and then.

If you really believe otherwise I encourage you to go have a chat with any one of a number of FOSS maintainers to hear their experiences pre and post LLMs.

Tbh I'm surprised it's only 57%, I had thought with all the reporting over the datacenter backlash it would be more like 75%+.

I'm not suggesting that current data modelling is no better than it was 60 years ago (it surely is), what I'm saying is that we have 60+ years of predictive record for the latter and 6 for the former, so let's not get ahead of ourselves.

To use your analogy: let's rather not get too complacent about figuring out the world isn't flat and risk placing all future bets on it being round.

Given this seems to be going nowhere, I will leave it here and let the record reflect who's conduct was ultimately problematic here. But I do think this level of frantic vitriol coming from yourself and others in the Graphene community is not doing anyone any favours, and hope to see it change some day.

> You're pushing fabricated stories and other falsehoods to mislead people about GrapheneOS and harm it.

I'm commenting on what I see as a consistent pattern of behaviour. An observation that is only increasingly apparent with every one of these (frankly) unhinged responses. To wit: I observe that you lambaste MicroG before, and here in response you double-down with even harsher rhetoric.

Graphene is highly regarded on the technical merits, with a notable uptick in stories on HN to this effect of late - why would you constantly and unrelentingly sully that like this?

Please do not respond with a list of grievances, re MicroG (or others) - I'd genuinely like a specific response to my very unambiguous and direct question.

For this specific comment in question, this is easily falsifiable: the top-level-comment was about signature spoofing, there was no mention of Graphene at all.

> What's toxic about responding to people attacking GrapheneOS?

You're making my point for me. Which, to be clear, I find sad because I want GrapheneOS to succeed, but that's really hindered by this behaviour.

2020s population forecasting has less than a decade's worth of record to go by, trying to say anything substantial about it risks falling into the same trap the article discusses.

The main thrust of the article (as I understood it) is historical context and how human processes can change given circumstance. So basically: demographic decline will be happening and well-understood until these circumstances no longer persist.

> GrapheneOS does provide open source reimplementations

The sad thing about GOS is that, despite whatever technical merits it may actually claim, the sheer toxicity of its community is enough to drive many interested users as far away as possible.

Case in point: this very comment by "grapheneos" predictably lambasting MicroG in great detail and then - without a hint of irony - giving GOS props for doing things the "right" way.

Your message would go so much further if for once you considered how it is being conveyed.

Edit: just came across several other essays-as-a-comment in this thread, further vindicating the sentiment.

His antics vis-à-vis propping up the far-right in Europe or calling people he doesn't like NPCs don't persuade you otherwise?

> they will ban females from the industry.

This just sounda oxymoronic. Overall, hard to know if this comment is intended as satire.