Using Microsoft or Google products for an office suite is generally a company decision. Where I work, we use Excel, and the rest of the MS Office suite. Any time we have interns I have to drill this into their head, as they continuously try and use Google Docs. This is a problem, because it can mean sensitive information goes to an untrusted server not bound by company security policies. It would also mean employees using their personal Google accounts would retain company information after leaving the company. These things are bad.

If the CFO is saying to use Excel, you use Excel. This isn't the hill to die on, and fighting it makes a horrible first impression if you're new.

They usually have interesting opinions or news about what they build, I find it quite useful for monitoring my ecosystem and learning new stuff.

Typical HN response: pivoting to a pedantic debate about licenses to avoid the actual ethical crisis.

Whether I use GPL, MIT, or a custom Copyleft, it doesn't solve the Cognitive Tax problem. Licensing doesn't fix the fact that a 'community' of highly-paid engineers expects me to provide years of non-perturbative logic for free, while they lack the bandwidth to even peer-review it without an LLM.

You say 'Free Software' protects the user. Fine. But who protects the outlier creator from being mentally strip-mined by a sea of Takers? You’re suggesting a better cage, not a path to sovereignty.

Again: If you can’t verify the math without a chatbot, are you a 'contributor' to the common good, or just a sophisticated parasite?"