human-driven technology goes brrrrr
You must log in or register to comment.
People will associate what you’re saying with pretty much everything even if it doesn’t make sense
Like how can one say that’s mansplaining and not just a baseless thought? What guarantees that they only do this with women?
And people still whinge about mansplaining not being a thing
i remember them saying the app wont get certain featues, cause it just makes the whole thing less secure. even tho the dude only has the pattern recognition of a dead crow, i do have to add that no company should be trusted, BUT having an open source client is a good way to win me over. and as far as i can tell, the molly devs would purge the ai implementation crazy fuckin fast anyway.
This is almost as good as the jackass who tried to tell Margaret Atwood that “the woman who wrote that book was talking about Muslims, not Christians”
That sounds good. Got a link?
To be fair, as soon as Signal chooses do to so, they can walk back any statement. Her words don’t hold much value either…
I guess people forgot how Mozilla not that long ago simply went ahead and deleted mentions of ‘never selling your data’
That’s why I embraced xmpp. I liked what Signal is doing, but I don’t believe any company, or anyone that owns one.
It’s why a lot of you are here lol
Lemmy users will really do anything before they believe a woman, won’t they?
"The man is still correct because the Signal CEO may claim that TODAY that engineers are not currently working on adding AI, but that doesn’t mean in the future she won’t say it was worked on in the past!"
Lemmy users will really do anything before they believe a woman, won’t they?
What a weird take on this.
💅
Are you a feminist by chance? Just asking cuz I know a feminist who uses this particular emoji a lot haha.
I’ll do anything before I believe a CEO. Gender is a social construct.
She’s the president of the foundation, the CEO of Signal is Brian Acton.
In all fairness, if a CEO doesn’t introduce themself as a CEO, there’s really no reasonable expectation for random internet strangers to know that.
I would have had no idea who that was.
I think key context is that the guy is representing himself as having special knowledge about what Signal is doing internally and what they’ll do next.
It’s not “you bump into some rando on the street. Don’t you know she’s CEO of Signal??”
It’s “you’re giving a Ted Talk about Signal. The woman in the front row offers a correction and you’re like, ‘shut up, dummy.’”
the guy is representing himself as having special knowledge about what Signal is doing internally and what they’ll do next.
I didn’t get that impression- to me it just came off as him being cynical about platform enshittification.
Like, with recent news of Nexus being sold, my reaction was to join a chorus of others excplaiming that Nexus is about to be shit. We don’t know that - we just know it’s being sold. But we’ve all seen a ton of services follow a similar path, so the assumption feels justified. If a Nexus employee came out and said “Don’t panic, literally nothing is going to change!” Whether that came from the janitor or CEO, I’d have a similar knee-jerk as the dude in the OP.
I also have no idea who the old or new CEO of Nexis is. If it happens to be a woman, me arguing with her wouldn’t be from sexism, it’d be because Nexus is setting the stage to go down the toilet.
Dude in OP absolutely could just be a misogynistic prick, but there’s certainly not enough info in the screencap to say so with any certainty.
In general perhaps, but he literally said
The engineers have already began laying out the ground work for such support.
This really makes it sound like he’s pretending to know what he’s talking about when he doesn’t.
funny story, I insulted a Microsoft exec, to their face, because they introduced themselves as “working for Microsoft”.
I told them in response, " Don’t worry, I won’t hold that against you." To which they asked, “What’s that supposed to mean?” I said, “You work for them and don’t even know? you certainly drank all the koolaide.”
almost lost my job over that when my employer found out.
I would have told them to bring back Clippy 📎 as an AI companion, but inappropriately erotic. 👠
So…Cortana?
If I found out I was talking down to a Microsoft exec when I thought I was talking to a regular employee, I’d double down.
He replied to her post about how signal won’t use AI and she said “we”. He 100% assumed a woman was a nobody so he paid no attention. This is all on him.
https://bsky.app/profile/meredithmeredith.bsky.social/post/3lrqccvwnqs2z
Important context. Yeah that definitely reduces the benefit of the doubt, but I still wouldn’t jump to sexism. People refer to the organizations they’re employed by as ‘we’ all the time - that doesn’t imply any kind of authority. He definitely assumed she was a nobody, but 99.999% of us are just peasants milking a roof over our heads from a system we have absolutely no control over… so, assuming she’s a nobody is a pretty safe assumption. Were she a dude and all else the same, I don’t see the conversation going any differently.
There are tons, and tons, and tons, and tons of examples of demonstrable and absolutely clear misogyny in our dumb fucking society - it’s really not necessary to try to find it by attempting to read between the lines.
So… unless that dude has a history of misogynistic bs, imo the safer assumption is that he’s being cynical about platform enshittification (and reasonably so when you consider the patterns shown by every single other platform), vs an attack based on gender.
Sometimes it’s obvious misogyny and sometimes it isn’t but this has the hallmarks.
It definitely does; my take is only that is has the hallmarks of more benign activity too. I can’t say with any certainty that it IS one or the other. Suspicion is justified; torches and pitchforks, not quite yet.
Because nobody on the internet ever talks down to a man.
If the owner of signal commented in this thread I would have no idea lol
There is no owner, it’s a 501c3. Meredith is the CEO.
Double-secret
Same difference
A section 501©(3) organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the creator’s family, shareholders of the organization, other designated individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests. No part of the net earnings of a section 501©(3) organization may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. A private shareholder or individual is a person having a personal and private interest in the activities of the organization.
From IRS.gov.
It really isn’t. The designation should be meaningful because it is. So what are you even talking about?!
I think my username applies to you, this distinction doesn’t really matter in the context of my original comment so everyone rushing to correct me is funny lnao
This happens to me a lot. I would be using some terms loosely and people would only jump to them, getting the wrong idea. People really need to chill out, let us have a causal conversation.
It’s really not. It’s an important distinction.
For this discussion it isn’t really relevant which title they hold in the organization, I still wouldn’t recognize them lol.
She posted with a “we” statement about her own company. If someone did that, you might think about who they are but this guy completely assumed she was a know nothing nobody.
https://bsky.app/profile/meredithmeredith.bsky.social/post/3lrqccvwnqs2z
Well now you would ;)
No lol
deleted by creator
Didn’t realize I clicked a link and wondered when the screenshot was going to end…
Thank you for that!
I have been laughing for the past hour.
I wonder if he would have done the same thing talking to a man…
People are putting this on sexism or whatever, but I feel like this dude is just one of those confidently wrong people and would have said this to literally anyone disagreeing with him.
I am a man, and an expert in my field, and I get people trying to condescend semi-regularly because they think they can handwave the problems I get paid to solve. Just completely unfounded confidence.
I wonder [whether] he would have done the same thing talking to a man…
I was entertained to see someone get their comeuppance.
I was disappointed to see someone else immediately go sexist on the post.
I am now doubly disappointed that we’re not better than that person, here.
Sometimes an idiot is just an idiot. Leave room for people to grow into, okay?
And sometimes idiots are sexist.
Why are you dismissing this as a possibility?
Why are you dismissing this as a possibility?
They’re not. The burden of proof works in a way that the person making a claim (“they’re sexist”) needs to back it up with evidence. They’re not saying he’s definitively not sexist; they’re saying there’s insufficient evidence.
But it’s not unreasonable to suspect sexism, even if we don’t know for sure one way or the other. Suspicious behavior isn’t proof of guilt, but it’s still pretty sus 😒
Okay, but she just responds with the misandrist “why are men”, obviously directly accusing him of being sexist on inconclusive circumstantial evidence. That’s going well beyond “suspecting” him of anything.
What she doesn’t realize is that he’s secretly leading a coup from inside the company.
/joke
ROFL Reply guys, they are a special kind of dumb sometimes.
Why is the “why are men” part added in the original screenshot? Language like that only helps the manosphere recruit. Just use person specific language.
Edit: @DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social @SarcasticCephalopod@lemmy.world @braxy29@lemmy.world @Dogiedog64@lemmy.world
why did you downvote this? I don’t disagree that guy is being an ass I’m commenting on the language used.
we downvoted because we didnt like your comment
hope that helps
I’m downvoting because of your edit complaining about down-votes.
I wish my instance allowed down votes for this very reason.
Are you editing in all the people who is downvoting you?
You can see who downvotes you on lemmy?
deleted by creator
He is lmfao, what a dork.
Also, even this suggestion betrays a lack of understanding about how signal works. A big part of the long term security signal offers is that they don’t store data, so LLM integration would be on-device.
