Not bragging about hiring a dude whose entire portfolio is invasive mass surveillance would be a start.
Edit to add: Since the genie's out the bottle on that, a little bit of transparency over what the dude's role in their company actually is and what their intentions are, or heck, literally anything would be nice.
Like, personally I think 'ceasing to be a cop' is the best thing a person in the police could ever possibly do and pretty much proof they are salvageable as a person, so I'm already inclined to think positively of the espionage dude they hired. But their complete and total opacity, all the way down to blocking/banning anyone who criticised them over it, suggests that his presence in the company is not just a case of 'he's good with tech and we hired him', but rather that his expertise in surveillance specifically is the reason he was hired, and yes, there will be insidious things in new Pi models.
How would they achieve that?
Not bragging about hiring a dude whose entire portfolio is invasive mass surveillance would be a start.
Edit to add: Since the genie's out the bottle on that, a little bit of transparency over what the dude's role in their company actually is and what their intentions are, or heck, literally anything would be nice.
Like, personally I think 'ceasing to be a cop' is the best thing a person in the police could ever possibly do and pretty much proof they are salvageable as a person, so I'm already inclined to think positively of the espionage dude they hired. But their complete and total opacity, all the way down to blocking/banning anyone who criticised them over it, suggests that his presence in the company is not just a case of 'he's good with tech and we hired him', but rather that his expertise in surveillance specifically is the reason he was hired, and yes, there will be insidious things in new Pi models.