Re: [SOLVED (magic?)] (was: [app password does not work (at the moment)])

[tomas@tuxteam.de]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1732 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 09:37:03PM +0200, Tomas Hlavaty wrote:
> On Mon 06 Jun 2022 at 21:07, <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 08:55:42PM +0200, Tomas Hlavaty wrote:
> >> On Thu 02 Jun 2022 at 17:37, Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es> wrote:
> >> > I can now again access my private gmail account,
> >> 
> >> I thought you were forced to use google by your university but I see
> >> that that is not the case.  You have a choice.
> >> https://www.stallman.org/google.html
> >
> > This choice would entail losing his job?
> 
> Why would he lose his job?

Because his employer insists on handling job-related mails via gmail?

See, i've seen several employers: most of them want to keep control
of their work related mails in some way.

The "tradidional" way of handling this is by setting up their own
mail infrastructore (whatever that means, the spectrum covers some
space, from "just" setting up an SMTP server to offering (voluntary
or enforced) some horrible web mail service; some allow forwarding
to user chosen infrastructure, some don't).

The gist is that they want some accountability of important mails.

Anyway, the next step is for those employers to fall for the cloud
fallacy: outsource above mentioned infrastructure. Still, the condition
stands. Either you take part of that infrastructure or you go look
for another job [1].

Showing up at the office from time to time isn't optional either,
for many jobs after all.

Cheers

[1] No, this doesn't justify forcing people to use gmail, and I
   know that I'd raise a stink if my employer wanted me to do
   that. But I'd *never* try to tell other people how much of
   a hero they are expected to be.

-- 
t

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]