Sure. And whether he was a sacrificial goat here is not for us to know. But let’s not pretend that the CEO had no responsibility.

Whether or not it was his idea is irrelevant, he’s the one who approved it.

Those all sounds like generic automated emails to me.

Why not then post the personalized emails? This particular email just doesn’t look incriminating to me. Sure it is POSSIBLE that someone at Reddit specifically added him to the email list, but that’s hardly the most likely explanation.

ITT: People complaining about an automated email that gets send to a huge largely uncurated mailing list. This is so very obviously not an email someone at reddit personally addressed to Andrew Tate, let alone personally selected him to be added to the mailing list.

Seriously, people, there’s plenty to complain about without making up new stuff.

We are nowhere near AI writing our software unattended. Not even close. People really over estimate the state of AI.

To be fair people who pay thousands are probably perfectly fine with Starfield, although they may have to be satisfied with 120fps instead of 240fps.

The ones mainly hurting are the ones with similar budgets as console gamers. And console gamers are hardly unfamiliar with performance issues.

Being a pc gamer has much more to do with what ecosystem you get to tap into, rather than how much you’re spending.

Yeah that’s fair. I’d say it falls into the same boat as the argument against the CEO; they haven’t done anything clearly malicious, but their bad decisions are enough to give you pause and reconsider.

Go and have a look? https://github.com/brave/brave-browser

Being open-source doesn’t automatically make you secure or reputable. Especially considering the open-source ecosystem in particular is a big target for exploitation right now. And auditing a software project of this size by its source code alone is no small feat.

it is also the most private and secure, open-source, mainstream* Chromium browser

“Mainstream chromium browser” is doing most if not all the heavy lifting there. Fair enough if that’s what you’re after, but mixing “private and secure, open-source” in feels disingenuous.

That said, I primarily use Vivaldi because of its customizability and added features, something Firefox seems to reduce with every new version.

Last time I played with either Vivaldi or Brave you had to literally monkey patch the source code in order to customize things further than what the extension SDK allowed you to. You could do the same thing with Firefox, except they make it slightly harder because much of the source code is shipped in archives.

That said it’s been years, maybe this can now be done purely through the extension SDK? It’d be news to me.

Given their crypto functionality uses a third party which has been found to skirt the legal system I’d be a lot more concerned about this integration even if I don’t intend to use it.

Keep in mind the stuff you read about is only what has been surfaced so far. Who knows what skeletons are still hiding?

Personally, I don’t see any point risking it when there are perfectly viable alternatives such as Firefox. Granted the same guy infected Mozilla, but they stood up and ousted him so credit where credit is due.

You see, when someone is known to make bad choices it makes sense to approach what they do with apprehension. This guy not only has a history of bad choices, he’s also the CEO.

You’re free to do as you like of course, but I’d say it’s hardly fair to say the article is unconvincing.