> But from watching that statement I do both agree with him and believe he is being honest in that specific case.
Yes, and the linked paper shows that this is a reflection of your existing bias about him, and not whether he is being truthful. It means that the clip of Elon tells us nothing at all about why he’s making the statement, even if judged by experts.
I don’t see how Hollywood is evidence of anything. They want their movies to have the widest audience possible, so their movie content is made as inoffensive as possible.
Elon’s cars are not movies.
For a counterexample, Tim Cook praises China, even as reports suggest that Apple and its shareholders are afraid of their dependence on China and are seeking to lessen it.
Elon has never behaved like Hollywood, and has a long history of saying whatever he thinks people want to hear. I see no reason to think that this is any different.
I see nothing combative here, and nobody is forcing you to write replies you don’t want to. I disagree that simply making a naked claim is ‘reasoning’.
“The moon is made of cheese.” is a statement, but isn’t reasoning.
More likely, the EU will demand that alternative stores be regulated and that override controls exist, precisely so that they can outlaw E2EE and block other apps they want to restrict.
The EU isn’t doing any of this to support some principle of end-user freedom. It’s all just a consequence of lobbying and politics. They aren’t going to do anything that reduces their own control.
> What makes a business have government approval is two things
I see no evidence that you have the expertise to make this claim. It’s just an opinion you are stating as fact.
> We all have the ability to judge tonality and the detail Elon puts into that statement to make the qualitative judgement call whether he's pandering or he believes in what he says…
“In accuracy, judges range no more widely than would be expected by chance, and the best judges are no more accurate than a stochastic mechanism would produce. When judging deception, people differ less in ability than in the inclination to regard others' statements as truthful.”
So all this tells us is that you are someone who personally finds Elon credible. Given your own stated views of China, this seems like just confirmation bias.
> To become something attainable in practice we would have to start supporting the companies that are focused on the more important things first until they are mature enough to be able to dedicate time and resources to optimize for convenience.
What happened to open source?
> The problem is that when we prize convenience above other things and we end up with stupid things like customers arguing about the color of their speech bubbles.
That’s a fair point, in that if consumers prioritized open infrastructure over convenience, a commercial enterprise would too. However this is back to the earlier point - there is no point railing about that. It’s just a fact that most people want to just buy the nicest thing they can with their money.
With all due respect, it seems that you have conceded that a convenient, spam free, open option not only doesn’t exist in practice, but can’t in principle.
That’s more than even I believe. I just think nobody in the OSS space has put the work in to figure it out yet.
> I could get my parents who are nearing their 70s to use Element (Matrix) and it took them less than 10 minutes, even with me asking them to register to a non-default homeserver.
Well in that case Element would be the solution we’re looking for, except that not everyone’s parents have someone like you to help them.
And as for the desire for convenience, it’s hard to imagine you seriously believe that only Americans value convenience over resilience. If that were true, the rest of the world would be using Element rather than WhatsApp.
Simply railing against people’s needs doesn’t change them.
> They should have been drafting absurd standards centered around their own servers, and taunting Google into adopting it.
It's hard to imaging you sincerely think this would have been better. It seems like you want them to engage in dishonesty.
> But instead they played high and mighty, and now they have to contend with the law.
iMessage isn't going anywhere. They're just going to add RCS support in the same way that SMS is supported, because now there is momementum for carrier support. This is really a storm in a teacup.
> open it up to let other people run their own servers instead of trying to control everything.
If you know of a good open architecture that solves the problems of spam and impersonation while maintaining the convenience and ease of use necessary for mass adoption, please share it.
Honestly, if the poster is serious about being a professional manager and wants good advice on this, they should reach out to a professional organization that provides resources e.g.:
You need to give more info about what the actual problems are. Without knowing that, people can only offer advice based on stereotypes, which are often innaccurate.
Yes, and the linked paper shows that this is a reflection of your existing bias about him, and not whether he is being truthful. It means that the clip of Elon tells us nothing at all about why he’s making the statement, even if judged by experts.
I don’t see how Hollywood is evidence of anything. They want their movies to have the widest audience possible, so their movie content is made as inoffensive as possible.
Elon’s cars are not movies.
For a counterexample, Tim Cook praises China, even as reports suggest that Apple and its shareholders are afraid of their dependence on China and are seeking to lessen it.
Elon has never behaved like Hollywood, and has a long history of saying whatever he thinks people want to hear. I see no reason to think that this is any different.