> How did we go in 20 years from holding these companies to account when they'd misbehave to acting as if they are poor damsels in distress whenever someone points out a flaw?

Honestly I think the problem is more a rosy view of the past versus any actual change in behavior. There have always been defenders of such companies.

> How did we go in 20 years from holding these companies to account when they'd misbehave to acting as if they are poor damsels in distress whenever someone points out a flaw?

They hired a ton of people on very very good salaries

I think big tech being so big now that these "issue" is too small for their priority is saying something

You better thank god for MS for being lazy and incompetent, the last thing we want for big tech is being innovative and have a stronger monopoly

The original comment said to stop giving money to these companies if they are not giving you a satisfactory service.

The opposite, to be lazy and to continue giving them money whilst being unhappy with what you get in return, would actually be more like defending the companies.

I won't "defend" Microsoft in this case, but I am always annoyed by phrases like "world's biggest billion-dollar businesses... bablah".

Their size or past misbehaviors shouldn't be relevant to this discussion. Bringing those up feels a bit like an ad hominem. Whether criticism is valid should depend entirely on how GitHub Actions actually works and how it compares to similar services.

No that's actually a completely different issue. You're talking about volunteers working on side projects that are sometimes foundational to the way the internet works and then people feel entitled to tell them what to do without contributing.

Here we are talking about one of the worlds most valuable companies that gets all sorts of perks, benefits and preferential treatment from various entities and governments on the globe and somehow we have to be grateful when they deliver garbage while milking the business they bought.