News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by implements on Friday June 22, 2018 @06:33AM (#17372907)
There's some in the military that'd beg you not to work on MS Office - specifically Powepoint:

http://theweek.com/articles/673091/general-mattis-save-milit...

[Genuine question: New here, is this style of post too Reddit for HN?]

Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by majewsky on Friday June 22, 2018 @06:52AM (#17372987)
I think it's okay. Just a small quip thrown in from the side that's still relevant to the topic of discussion. It would not be okay (IMO) if you tried to derail the discussion to focus on your link instead; in this case, a regular submission should be made.
Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by paulie_a on Friday June 22, 2018 @09:16AM (#17373693)
To be fair you should just refuse to work on PowerPoint because you will save millions, potentially billions of hours of other people's time that have to endure those presentations.
Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by 5874-4b22-a4e0 on Friday June 22, 2018 @09:39AM (#17373850)
Crimes against humanity.
Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by ethbro on Friday June 22, 2018 @09:01AM (#17373608)
Imho, the important thing is the degree to which a comment contributes or adds information to the discussion.

So something like linking an article about PPT overuse in the military w/ a quip is much better than just a quip at PPT's expense. (Given that some people might not be aware of the reported overuse of PowerPoint in the US military)

Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by eaandkw on Friday June 22, 2018 @09:14AM (#17373683)
Ha. I was going to say death by PowerPoint. Or even PowerPoint commandos. I hated working with PowerPoint when I was in the USMC.
Re:Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Mi... by dahdum on Friday June 22, 2018 @09:08AM (#17373648)
Including the article makes it an interesting tangent in my view.