[cercatrova]

I like your first sentence, but unsarcastically. Companies should always strive to do more with fewer employees by automating them away.

As for the rest of your argument, most people are not like you, as they will not want to spend time setting up their own mail server. For companies this is doubly true, as they will likely spend more money setting it up, maintaining it, and upgrading it, than the subscription actually costs.

[scollet]

> Companies should always strive to do more with fewer employees by automating them away.

I wonder if those same companies intend to socialize the wealth generated by their automation.

[cercatrova]

Of course not, there is no incentive to do so. Until there is, nothing will change. I am all for socialization of wealth, as money in circulation boosts the economy more than hoarding it, but I just don't understand how people can say that companies should (morally) socialize their wealth "out of the goodness of their hearts" without some incentive. Companies, like all organizations of individual agents, do not have collective morals. They are merely machinations that have the sole fitness function of increasing wealth, at whatever cost. If we take this to be true, why exactly would, without another fitness function, a company socialize wealth?

[fulldecent2]

I think we've reached peak Hacker News. This is now looking like Slashdot.

[ChainOfFools]

I'd actually prefer slashdot's moderation/meta moderation model to the one used by HN, though it's hard to fault the job dang and co. are doing with their hands-on approach.

[kevin_thibedeau]

Horizontal integration of business processes means a lot of external stakeholders have you by the balls.

[brentis]

This. Bunch of crappy apps which meet the minimum rqt to keep you in the ecosystem. Teams is the business equivalent of imessage. Keeps people on msft products vs. switching platforms. That plus finance folks cant not have their Excel for their 30-tab whatevers.