RIP, AIM (1997-2017)
A blockbuster story from Bloomberg on an alleged rape of one Microsoft intern at the hands of another raises questions both for how Microsoft handled the situation then as well as broader questions of how large tech companies will adjust to a new reality.
Three big questions:
Microsoft declined to respond specifically to these questions, instead issuing the same statement it gave to Bloomberg. However, that statement suggests the company, even today, believes it acted appropriately.
Why it matters: Large tech companies have tens or hundreds of thousands of employees and, in addition to all the clear-cut cases of sexual harassment or assault, no doubt have all manner of more complex issues from their past, some of which will no doubt come under fresh scrutiny with a new sensibility applied.
What's next: I'd be shocked if I am the only one left scratching their head over how Microsoft handled this one. And I'd also be shocked if other big tech companies won't also soon be dealing with tricky issues from their past.
A story from The Intercept suggests the nation's biggest civil rights groups were largely divided along 'who took telco money' lines when it came to the FCC's move to repeal its 2015 net neutrality rules.
Other threads to follow:
Security firm FireEye disclosed some details Thursday of a recent attack on a critical infrastructure provider by what appears to be either a state actor or state-sponsored actors.
What's not being shared: FireEye isn't saying what type of infrastructure was attacked, or even in which country it was located. (Reuters reported that two other security firms say the target firm was in the Middle East, with one saying Saudi Arabia.)
Why it matters: In many cases, nations may be trying to infiltrate key infrastructure to have a way in should they wish to attack, but aren't necessarily looking to do damage now. This incident shows in some cases they may be doing damage nonetheless.