Does anyone seriously use googles commercial products?

Yes, email, drive, sheets, meet.

probably the folks who don't run office365.

Yep. And they work quite well actually.

yep, we do

Agreed. Americans why are you like this?

They needed to differentiate themselves from the brits... and this is the result.

They hate us because we’re happy

Too afraid to be yourself for fear of being fired. I have an “American corporate personality” now too. Ultra PC etc. I don’t even use regular pronouns anymore by default o use they/them. I try hard to avoid saying “guys”.

I’ve worked in Asia and Europe and America has a special culture where you have to be nice and positive all the time or else…because there is basically no worker protection laws against that discriminate firing, you can’t do much about it either.

Or on antidepressants en masse, it's sometimes hard to tell :)

Nobody sane hates you, personally or collectively.

But we can definitely dislike certain aspects of certain cultures, especially since in this case that culture is the most massively exported culture in the history of mankind.

Of course the gp comment is out of place and taste.

We are happier and more friendly. I have no idea why though. :)

Faker and on antidepressants would be my take

Deeply cynical.

Because Europeans and Australians and the rest of the world despite their "super advanced and non-bizarre" ways can't seem to develop advanced technologies of their own to use instead so they just use American ones and then complain about them?

At least you have coal, and killing the Great Barrier Reef I guess?

Not sure if you think training LLMs is carbon neutral, but if so I have some news about the barrier reef that you're not going to be that pleased to hear

In Europe, we developed the web.

Shame what big tech has done with it.

Next you're going to say: "I was only pretending to be an idiot!"

From pacemakers, Google Maps, to Wi-Fi, I wouldn't say Australians can't develop advanced technologies.

Great. Let them use Aussie AI.

CrikeyGPT

They have aligned themselves with he people you should exactly NOT trust. Corporations and governments.

So... pretty much everyone who matters in our current system.

Was a good meme about this somewhere, how DocuSign was not automated at all and the 7000 employees was so they could scan everything physically.

I'll take window number 2, whilst continuing the notion that they haven't lowered their greed.

Quite frankly, it's just not worth the time or maintenance.

You'll eat your words once your only option is corpomail.

Sounds like I should increase my climate / sustainability consultantcy fraud by 45%

Probably the fact that the US Intelligence agencies can't spy on it.

Are you suggesting the French government wants their ministers to be spied upon by the US intelligence services?

Allegedly the major governments participate in a cooperative spying exchange dubbed Five Eyes. Since it's illegal for Country A to spy on their own citizens, they instead have Country B do it and vice-versa. Then participants exchange info in a quid-pro-quo fashion.

5 eyes - US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand.

France not a member.

My thoughts exactly, albeit not easily extracted from my comments.

Ffs why do we need arbiters of truth on the internet. We didn't trust in back in the day, why are we under a notion that we can and should trust it today?! Where are people's critical thinking skills?

Back in the day there wasn’t much value in convincing people on the internet that arbiters of truth were needed because there weren’t enough people on the internet to determine political power contests.

There were enough people watching television back in the day to determine political power contests, and hey would you look at that there were arbiters of truth there back in the day.

> Where are people's critical thinking skills?

When there are nations working on manipulating people, with presumably significant budgets, you can't really fault people for getting fooled occasionally.

We very much need to give the truth a leg up because there are powerful moneyed interests peddling lies.

Also because the threat is diffuse, so it’s not as easy to sue for (say) slander as it was with newspapers.

> there are powerful moneyed interests peddling lies

When has this not been the case?

> the threat is diffuse, so it’s not as easy to sue for (say) slander as it was with newspapers.

By this, do you mean that anonymity is preventing lawsuits? Regardless, it's never been easy to sue newspapers and win.

> Ffs why do we need arbiters of truth on the internet.

Because otherwise people might believe the wrong lies.

I've never read something so self ingratiating, yet also rant like. Seemingly an average social network post. No content, all substance.