This isn't all or nothing. If you are in a position to do so, you can both advocate for yourself AND go to management with data suggesting that your coworkers are worth more. If you're in a leadership role, you have the opportunity and the duty to advocate for your coworkers.
I swapped to Linux back before COVID after I realized that the few Windows specific tasks I still ran were running in VMs anyway. Since then, I've been fully Linux and I've rarely needed Windows for anything but installing custom Android ROMS and reading Adobe DRMed files.
Microsoft actually made the process easier by making Office 365 useful. If I need MS Office specifically I can just run it well enough from a browser.
Linux user here, also once upon a time a Windows admin. I think the most difficult thing for most users is not that Linux is difficult, but that it is different.
Take PopOS for example. For the average "I check email and surf the web" user, it works wonderfully. But most people grew on Windows or Mac so its just not what they're used to. Linux is kind of the stick shift to Windows and Mac's automatic transmission... its not hard to learn, but most folk don't choose to make the effort because they don't need to.
I'm a fan of a copyright term similar to the original US copyright term. Fourteen years at the outset, with an additional seven (versus the 14) upon the payment of a fee scaled based on the revenue generated by a work (to be used to support artistic grants.) After all, if the argument is that copyright is necessary to protect artists' economic interests, it follows that copyright holders wishing to extend should pay back into that system if they want to extend.
DeSantis's motivation here is transparently obvious; to keep the people who oppose his party from voting. We should be striving to make voting easier, not harder. A shame this is just the latest in a long history of voter suppression or disenfranchisement. Those of us who support independent and third party candidates are all too aware of the overt attempts to silence dissenting voices.
Key of the previous comment is reasonable. One might as well say that Trump provided a reasonable basis for denying the election results, or that climate deniers are being reasonable in denying the wealth of evidence supporting the idea of man-made climate change. If we're willing to reject abjectly idiotic claims in one case, we should be rejecting them across the board whether we like the politics of the person in question or not.
TL;DR: The author is engaging in agenda driven conspiracy porn which they know or should know is false. As such, it is reasonable to assume that they're either willfully ignorant or acting in bad faith.
And they offer no reasonable basis for distrusting Signal, the tech that they attempt to vilify. Given said dev's past comments, it is reasonable to infer that the reference to China presents them as an example to be followed here.
I read their pricing info and I get where they're coming from, but it is expensive for an average user. Maybe if people adopt it, prices will come down? I have no problem with people making money on good ideas... but I also get that it gets expensive to pay for all these services. Between Proton, Tresorit, and my other services... I pay a fair bit for the extra protection.
Of course, using add-ons also requires diligence, as each add-on from each source requires one to both trust the source and vet each source regularly. An add-on is also as trustworthy as the people that made it, and one must be willing to do the work the verify that those add-ons continue to be safe.
TLDR, the thought is that the USA is spying on users of Signal because some early funding came from the US government. But the evidence suggests not; indeed, governments worldwide are targeting Signal et al because they don't LIKE that they can't just demand access from providers.
This is posted relatively often, and every time it is posted I feel compelled to note that said dev has not articulated any real reason to consider Signal insecure beyond an implicit conspiracy theory with no real meat to it.
"Signal's use luckily never caught on by the general public of China (or the Hong Kong Administrative region), whose government prefers autonomy, rather than letting US tech control its communication platforms, as most of the rest of the world naively allows."
When you're holding up China as an example for the world to follow for privacy, I have a hard time taking ANYTHING else you're claiming seriously.
If you sign up with a masked address then they only have that. You can likely sign up for more than once if you're needing a new pool of searches, though obviously paying for searches might out you.
I did a bit of comparison... they're at LEAST using Google and Bing, probably a couple more. I tested with searches I'd already done outside of Kagi and it identified most of the relevant results I'd had to ID across multiple engines before. I do think the price is ah, pricey though, and I'd want more info before I used it for sensitive stuff.
Instances likely need global moderators or a team of admins that can address the issue. The growth of Lemmy and Kbin left the larger communities without enough volunteer staff to deal with the influx.
The instances would also benefit from a bit of cross-site collaboration. If a terrible user is spamming / botting / trolling, having a "league of allied instances" willing to ban and block the user on all of them would be beneficial.
Because people don't grasp what "free speech" means, at least in the US context.
Freedom of speech (expression) protects one against government interference with expression. The US government can't stop you from saying bigoted, racist, or sexist things because you have the freedom to express yourself.
But.
Freedom of speech doesn't require anyone to offer you a platform to share your views, nor does it mandate an audience. If your views are unpopular, freedom of speech doesn't prevent others from denying you business or employment generally either; the ol' "consequences of your actions" principle.
Bad actors want the right, a mandated platform, and no consequences for being shitty. They get upset when they find out that they're entitled to neither a platform nor protection from consequence.
This isn't all or nothing. If you are in a position to do so, you can both advocate for yourself AND go to management with data suggesting that your coworkers are worth more. If you're in a leadership role, you have the opportunity and the duty to advocate for your coworkers.