TheTrueLinuxDev

If that is common in your area, I would probably go with grow tent as my next step.

Microsoft: "Gotta keep all of the telemetries and AI running 24/7 of course!"

I don't think it's possible for them to do so, because that would means killing the gaming aspect of Windows. GPU on cloud is stupidly overpriced and expensive, just look at Standard_NV6 for an example, it easily cost $10,000/yr according to this (Just look for anything that have "N" in it's name for GPU enabled VM and they are all expensive.)

If they try to ban everyone from being allowed to use their own computer hardware, I really doubt people would stay on Windows, they most likely would be in the 5 stages of griefs and then contemplate on switching to either Linux or Mac OSX.

I would honestly hope you bring it up to your agency to start offering chat channels that are end to end encrypted and have all history wiped clean after certain period of time.

Probably both and Network Effect is still a thing that he would consider.

And bonus when you have steel ball attached weapon and toss it to hit the big button switch in the shrine.

I think it's better to create a division between corpo-social media and public social media. Everything that corporation does just muddle the water.

I see your point, but I believe there's a bit more to it. In my understanding, Reddit has sort of turned the down-voting system into a game - it influences the sorting algorithm and fosters a competitive environment for opinions rather than acting purely as a filter for content quality. If we were to make down-vote counts invisible and exclude them from the sorting process, we might be able to remove this element of competition.

Could we think about repurposing the down-vote function to serve a different role? Similar to the report function, which signals a need for moderator review, the down-vote could be used in the same way to flag content that might require a second look. This could assist in handling extreme or illegal content without suppressing diverse opinions or content simply because it doesn't receive wide agreement.

What if we displayed only the "+1" upvotes on the website without showing any down-vote counts? This would maintain a positive atmosphere and could encourage more open dialogue. Essentially, a down-vote would transition from meaning "I disagree" to "this might need reviewing".

Importantly, if content isn't extreme or illegal but still gathers a significant amount of down-votes, it could be an indicator for the moderator to assess if further action is necessary. This shifts the down-vote function from being a tool for disagreement to a measure for maintaining the quality of discourse.

This seems to be intentional disinformation. The prefix 'dis-' implies intention, whereas 'mis-' suggests unintentionality.

I think we need to start curating a list of writers that aren't intentionally spewing uninformed craps. We need to start posting legit writer's articles and blacklist all other hostile writers.

Ah ok, got it.

Same, it's like we're watching from the sideline seeing all of the sheep going head fast off the cliff.