FWIW: I realized this year that there are whole cohorts of management people who have absolutely zero relationship with the words that they speak. Literal tabula rasas who convert their thoughts to new words with no attachment to past statements/goals.
Put another way: Liars exist and operate all around you in the top tier of the FAANGS rn.
These people are putting their bodies on the line. It is a public protest. I cannot infer anything other than that they’re willing to risk everything, including their privacy to defend their ideas.
Loss of revenue puts people at risk of famine and indentured servitude.
This isn't a cultural thing. Human evolution is ugly. Evolution's filter function is death. If you can't feed yourself, nature will use you for food.
You are coming from a place of extreme privilege lamenting that people get stressed about losing a job. It's not a minor inconvenience if you're working on something you think is important. Button pushers have little to mourn. People working on big projects have to establish new goals for themselves & align themselves with an entirely new professional network. These are not minor things.
It does serve a purpose. It announces to everyone in their vicinity that this fragile human is deficient and should only be interacted with via great caution.
edit: I don't understand the downvotes here. Is it considered poor manners to point out that people don't get to control how people perceive them?
It isn’t good to see large communities of humans burning mental calories to come to the same set of conclusions (I’m on team sandwich because $REASON | I’m on team taco because $REASON). It is a mental D.o.s. directed towards humans that tend towards herding.
>>To take a person and alias them into being "good" or "bad" based on an action or a series of actions is to explicitly dehumanize them
The only reliable method for evaluating someone’s values is to assess the choices they make. What values do their actions suggest? Do these choices affect your ability to trust these people?
I fundamentally disagree that it dehumanizes to do this, and I also fundamentally disagree that anyone intends to dehumanize them with this approach. I find it troubling that anyone expresses such a black and white assessment of people trying to determine where others should fit in the herd.
Put another way:
the only way to judge someone’s ethics is by evaluating their action and comparing it against their words.
>> 4.) It only works on GSM, i.e 2G. Hardly anyone uses that these days. (I don't know if a similar passive approach would work on 3G and 4G, it may be that only software is required in order to support more than 2G).
Do you have some data that supports this claim? I haven't gone sniffing recently- but I believe T-mobile is still wed to 2G for the foreseeable future, and internationally, 2G is still in a lot of countries. I believe one northern european telco is going to decommission their UMTS network and support both LTE & GPRS.
Hey- if you are the author, I want to say I support what you are doing. We need more projects like this. But when I read the source, looks pretty lean to me in terms of follow on functionality. Would love to help you expand on this.
FWIW: I realized this year that there are whole cohorts of management people who have absolutely zero relationship with the words that they speak. Literal tabula rasas who convert their thoughts to new words with no attachment to past statements/goals.
Put another way: Liars exist and operate all around you in the top tier of the FAANGS rn.