翻转质子电荷的不是AI
It wasn't AI that flipped Proton's charge

原始链接: https://blog.raed.dev/posts/proton-loser-thinking/

长期使用 Proton 的用户表示,关于其领导层推动 AI 的报道动摇了他们的信任。争议本身并不在于 AI 编程,只要经过审查和测试就可以接受,而在于 CEO Andy Yen 对安全问题的处理:他把工程师要求进行渗透测试的请求斥为“loser thinking”,将 AI 使用与工作保障挂钩,并且即使放弃该计划,仍把其视为有用。对于一家隐私公司来说,谨慎发布是其价值的核心,而一个可能暴露邮件的漏洞可能是致命的。Reddit 上员工的辩护似乎与公司口径一致,而非真正的异议。除非工程师仍能将安全置于速度之上,用户可能停止推荐 Proton。

Hacker News 的讨论围绕 Proton CEO Andy Yen 据报道将一名工程师提出的渗透测试请求斥为“胡扯和失败者思维”展开,背景是内部为达成增长和 ARR 目标的压力。评论者认为 Proton 的核心价值是信任、隐私和谨慎的工程,因此以速度换取谨慎会削弱客户所付费的东西。许多用户表示信任已经流失,理由包括采用 AI、功能膨胀、政治声明和数据保留问题;一些人计划转向 mailbox.org 或 Tuta 等替代品。其他人则为 AI 作为工具辩护,并指出 Proton 必须与大型科技公司竞争。总体而言,该讨论反映出对 Proton 表现得像典型增长导向公司、从而可能失去隐私导向用户基础的担忧。
相关文章

原文

I’ve been paying for Proton for many years, and it’s what I recommend when someone asks how to get off Gmail. This week 404 Media published an investigation into how Proton’s leadership is pushing AI inside the company. The detail that made the rounds came from the security Slack channel: an engineer asked for a few days to pentest new code before shipping it, and CEO Andy Yen answered that it was “bullshit and loser thinking”, then told the team to stop lovingly handcrafting code and use AI more.

For the first time, I’m not sure I’d still recommend them.

A lot of the reactions treat this as an AI story, as if any AI-written code poisons the well, and I think that misses the point. Engineers using AI to write code is the new norm. It’s fine as long as there are guardrails around it: someone reviews what the model produced, it gets tested, and someone is accountable for what ships.

What the reporting describes is a CEO telling an engineer, in front of colleagues, that raising a security concern was “loser thinking”. Staff were told their AI usage could decide whether they kept their jobs, and when that plan was dropped after it leaked, Yen said it had already served its purpose. None of this is about AI. Plenty of companies are rolling out coding agents right now without humiliating anyone, so if Proton can’t, the problem sits with its leadership.

For most companies, trading some caution for speed is a reasonable call. Proton is a privacy company, though, and what its users pay for is the confidence that the people building it are careful. Shipping slowly and carefully is part of what they’re selling. A bad release from a B2B vendor can be catastrophic, but for a company like Proton, a bug that exposes users’ mail would be fatal.

One of the employees defending the company on Reddit added some context that was meant to help: Yen was fine with pentesting, as long as it didn’t slow down the pipeline.

This is one of a few employees pretending to courageously dissent, but in reality agreeing with the official corporate line. It reads like astroturfing and a clumsy attempt at crisis management. No employee who shared on Reddit disagrees with how things were handled or with where the company is going.

Beyond the clumsiness, it shows a leadership that now treats the constraints that made Proton worth paying for as the thing slowing it down.

I’d like to keep recommending Proton, but that depends on the engineer asking for a few more days of testing still winning the argument against a leadership obsessed with velocity and arbitrary release dates.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com