Is Microsoft trying to commit suicide?
Is Microsoft trying to commit suicide?
You're viewing a single thread.
Microsoft knows that the addition of adds to Windows, Recall, data mining, etc are not suicide. As far as tech news goes, Lemmy really exists in an echo chamber. The vast majority of us at least have some interest in technology. For the majority of the population, though, this isn't true. The typical person sees a computer as a tool to be used for other things. They're not reading articles about the latest release of Windows, new CPU technology, the latest GPU, etc. They're using their computer, and when it's time for an upgrade, they buy whatever suits their needs.
If I was to ask any of my family, or most of my coworkers, about any of the latest "controversies" surrounding Microsoft, they would have no idea what I was talking about. Microsoft obviously thinks that the added profits gained by monetizing their customers will offset the loss of 1% of their users that switch to Linux. They're probably right, too.
I like Windows, personally (well, Windows 10 at least). My unofficial rule has always been if it needs a GUI, then it runs Windows, otherwise, it runs Linux as a headless machine. Once Windows 10 is no longer a viable option, my unofficial rule will be "it runs Linux." Most people will not make this switch.
But you’re ignoring the entire enterprise side of things. MS Recall + pervasive data mining and ad injections are things that the vast majority of IT departments are going to refuse to sign off on. These technologies meaningfully and fundamentally undermine organizational and system security, up to and including potential inadvertent exposure of cryptographic secrets, which the modern internet is basically built on top of.
Sure, consumers are likely going to acquiesce out of either laziness or ignorance. But IT orgs aren’t going to simply sign off on this - particularly if they’re operating in an industry where InfoSec really matters (basically, any regulated industry like medical, biotech, or aerospace).
There is a huge corporate insensitive that everyone is not realizing here. By screen recording + OCR, there is a possibility to start using this data to replace some labor intensive, but simple tasks of operating a business. If you can create RPA+ML+LLM that can rerun repetitive tasks, you have holy grail on your hands. I think this is one of the big reason why M$ is pushing this.
I assume to be down voted to oblivion, but I do business automation and integration for living, and at the same time I am scared and excited.
Lmao do you have any idea how quickly that’s going to go off the rails? They’re going to get into a hallucination feedback loop, which will destroy the integrity of their systems and processes, and they’ll richly deserve it.
At any rate, most highly-effective technical teams have already automated the shit out of all their rote operations without using ML.
Absolutely. Corporations - at least, shitty ones (most of them) - are absolutely salivating at using this. They want to be able to see and easily summarize eeeeeeverything you're doing.
Some are absolutely already using a form of this. It's not a hypothetical - this is currently happening and many want way way more.
Automation suites exist and they are very much tuned to the individual apps. It seems giving ML an OCR readout of a page is not enough for it to know what it should do (accurately). We have had a training set for "booking flights on a browser" for about 6 years now and no one has figured out how to have it disrupt automated testing: https://miniwob.farama.org/
I was thinking about this, but I don't know what the plan us for annotating new flows with descriptions of the actions. There's no point in learning how to send an email or open a webpage, that's already easy. The value is in a database of uncommon interactions, but it's only valuable if there is a description to train on.
They'll just keep it shut off. It's not a requirement.
Will they not have licenses with all of this shit stripped out? Maybe another way to force ITs to pay for proper licensing and stuff too 🧐
Perhaps, but at this point, the only ones who actually know the endgame strategy are product people at MS, and they’re almost certainly bound by NDAs on that topic.
Are they? Some IT departments are going to love the invasive nature of it.
Then those IT departments should be blackballed from the industry, because the nature of that invasive surveillance is WILDLY insecure.
Unfortunately most large organizations are running on enterprise releases that only lay down minimal software. Plus IT depts have heavily maintained images that immediately shuts off anything that sneaks in. Help desk is just going to disable the feature before slapping the company background image and VPN on it and giving it to standard users. They will make a ton of money in the short term and EOL the operating system when it's no longer profitable and Linux is the default (decades from now). AOL is still out there
They didn’t have it set up to be easily disable-able, as far as I understand it.
That's partially true. The non-tech-savvy friends and family though need us to fix their Windows machines more or less constantly, and at some point we're not going to.
For me it was about 10 years ago when I forced everyone on to Mac at gunpoint just because I couldn't do Windows any.more. And even then it was another 6 years of explaining the differences in macOS and troubleshooting "office". Now when a friend's co-worker has a "computer problem" (read: Windows) I just say ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and I gotta tell ya it's friggin sweet.
That's always been my policy. I never used apples so I gave a big 'ol shrug if that's what needed fixing.
Once I get more comfortable with Linux, I'll be giving the same shrug to windows troubleshooting.
Daily use of Linux & MacOS is virtually identical. Same terminal commands. Similar file system standards. You have homebrew as a package manager on MacOS. You use whatever comes with your distro on Linux (dnf, apt-get, I forget the arch Linux one. Yaort? Yum?)
Really I see no reason for anyone to stay on Windows. You can play 99% of games on Linux these days. I'm not exaggerating, it's very specific multi-player games that don't work.
Maybe if you use specific software for a niche industry or purpose then it's worth having Linux. But even in those cases, you can just use a VM.
That's what I do on my MacBook pro. I have a VM with windows just to run a specific program a couple times a week.
On my desktop at home I just use Linux and have for the last 10 years or so
You wouldn't tell that to your grandma in her late 80s, who, unlike some grandmas, is utterly computer-illiterate, can only click pictures in Windows, doesn't understand even that TBH, and won't in that age learn anything new.
Then there's a question of whether you'll tell that to a girl with warm smile, long brown hair and luminous eyes if the situation arises.
Then there's that friend whose 'computer problem' prevents him from playing Factorio with you.
Life is more complex.
They’re using their computer, and when it’s time for an upgrade, they buy whatever suits their needs.
This always weirded me out - people who don't have any investment into Windows in the form of understanding are the most reluctant to even think about switching. I understand "advanced users" with their trusty FAR or TC and in general workflow which didn't change much in 20 years. But people who only use a browser?...
I think it's actually a rhetorical problem on my side. There's been a few cases where people (normies at that) who'd be utterly intolerant to the idea of leaving Windows switched to Linux on their own without my help in the periods where I wasn't meeting them often. It's as if my attempts to proselytize were counterproductive.