Most of the time, even high end computers don’t cut it because the optimization is dog shit.

You bet it is! It will throw more money at a custom CRM than any other company.

Every company wants a custom CRM or a customized one instead of choosing a CRM that fits the most important features that the company need and adapt the other processes to fit with the stock CRM as much as possible.

Fighting a CRM is a money pit and in the end, it becomes the worst of both worlds (expensive and shitty to use with the company processes)

Yeah but that time is long gone. Finance is throwing number in air of growth and profitability that must be met no matter what, and IT have to battle between what is effective, what the company tell them to do and what the users want, and in many case, the IT has a misplaced elitist attitude, like every user should know the infrastructure by heart and fix their problem themselves.

If a company uses other Microsoft products, chance are that Teams is bundled with whatever license they have. So for IT, it’s one less service to manage.

Lots of people care because it creates e-waste.

If the culture changes so that all consumers act like that and forces the companies to change their production cycle, that would be a big boon for the environment.

You got some serious reading comprehension issues. I am talking about you.

“akchually, there wasn’t enough racist comments”. One racist comment is too much.

The issue isn’t you doing your hobby projects however you want, it’s people being paid and produce LLM generated code.

And the biggest issue is managers/c-suites thinking that LLMs can replace senior devs.

And the biggest biggest issue is that the LLMs in their current mainstream form are terribly bad for the environment.

It’s rarely the case. You rarely work in vacuum where your work only affects what you do at the moment. There is always a downstream or upstream dependency/requirement that needs to be met that you have to take into account in your development.

You have to avoid the problem that might come later that you are aware of. If it’s not possible, you have to mitigate the impact of the future problems.

It’s not possible to know of all the problems that might/will happen, but with a little work before a project, a lot of issues can be avoided/mitigated.

I wouldn’t want civil engineers thinking like that, because our infrastructure would be a lot worse than it is today.

There is no issue here from Bitwarden POV, except the pushback they receive now.

Bitwarden got VC funding and the bell is ringing to bring the cows back in to be milked dry.

They are testing the water to see how people react, scale back a bit through whatever lies/PR, and will just wait for the right time to shove more shit.

This is a pattern we’ve seen over and over again.

That VC money was the start of the end. No reassurance can be trusted the moment a company accepts VC funding. It’s only a matter of time until Bitwarden makes their next enshittification move.

The direction that the company is taking. Clearly that Bitwarden feels like other open source projects are diverting revenue from them.

That’s a small step towards enshittification. They close this part of the software, then another part until slowly it is closed source.

We’ve seen this move over and over.

Stopping your business with Bitwarden over that issue sends a message that many customers don’t find this acceptable. If enough people stop using their service, they have a chance to backtrack. But even then, if they’ve done it once, they’ll try it again.

Your current price is 10$/year now. But the moment a company tries to cull any open source of their project is the moment they try to cash it in.

Do you have good resources to read on risc-v. I hear about it a lot, but haven’t found meaningful resources (to me) on it.

Thanks

I am the person that you called brain damaged. Clearly some reading comprehension issues.

You have the social skills of a rock and it shows.

We managed before remote start, we still can manage now.

What will happen is that more manufacturers will follow suit, until it becomes the norm and every manufacturer does it.

So be ready to be inconvenienced or be ready to pay.

To moment we stop acting like these things are necessary in the real sense of the term is the moment we can find workarounds. Because we know damn well that this practice won’t be legislated.

I sympathize with everyone that lives in cold climates because I do too and it fucking sucks having to heat the freezing car, but be ready to live without the feature because it will definitely be behind a paywall soon enough.

I live in Canada dickwad, I know what cold winters are, so cut your whining.

Remote start is a great QoL, and that’s why scummy companies hide it behind a paywall.

If enough people pay for the subscription, companies will keep doing it.

So the first step is push back and stop buying from companies that does that.

Second step is to not pay for the subscription when all the companies will be doing it, because let’s be real, all car manufacturers will follow suit.

So you will have to either stay in your car, which sucks, or find a workaround like a second key or , in my case, a code on the door.

It will inconvenience a lot of people and car manufacturers are counting on that to keep pushing that shit

I agree with you all the way. But we can kick and scream all we want, but if enough people buy the subscription, car manufacturers will keep hiding features behind paywalls.

It could make sense if the price were reflecting of not owning the car. But we know damn well that you would pay full price as if the car was yours, but you just wouldn’t own it.

I mean, his point is still valid. Take the 2-3 mins it takes to go down and start the car.

We managed before so let’s not pretend that wireless fob are necessary.