this post was submitted on 15 May 2026
991 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

84687 readers
4043 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I find this move concerning, and wish that the Founder had looked for a new CEO that shared his values rather than a Private Equity and Mergers Expert.

Furthermore, the change to the GRIT motto is worrying. Trust is useless without Transparency when it comes to code and security.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 34 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (3 children)

The company has long defined its values with the acronym “GRIT,” which used to stand for “Gratitude, Responsibility, Inclusion, and Transparency.” After May 4, it changed the acronym to stand for “Gratitude, Responsibility, Innovation, and Trust.”

It's not as bad as the headline seems. Transparency is still in the motto. The actual change is:

before

after

But still. Why change it at all? Why replace "inclusion" with "innovation"?

It smells like Tech Bro.

There's just no way to spin that positively, even giving them the benefit of the doubt, especially since they aren't rolling it back. Someone spent effort to make that values change, so its not an accident nor a "nothingburger".

[–] brownsugga@lemmy.world 2 points 48 minutes ago

Removing 'inclusion' smells like a pivot to the right, same way DEI is a target for maga

[–] Padit@feddit.org 33 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Well, trust is literally the oposite of transparency. So i would call it quite bad, especially if you consider that right now i trust these guys with my credit card details, my taxID, all my passwords.

[–] gnufuu@infosec.pub 18 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Exactly. In cybersec, trust is someting you try to avoid or at least minimize. Trying to use it as a selling point is ridiculous.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Or it's something you earn through transparency.

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

That's what they are trying to communicate here, yes. But 8.5 million users didn't need to be told they need to trust the platform, they chose to. As did I with a premium plan to cover MFA and attachments.

Now with business types in charge and a hidden doubling of the fees, that's more than halfway out the window no matter what the website stands for. I'm guessing somebody decided it's time to cash in on the goodwill they built over the past decade.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

That's a great point.

I don't want to trust them either. I don't want to have to.

The only "devil's advocate" argument I can think of is they're trying to appeal to enterprise clients (who would not know that and want to "trust" a security company). That would explain the "I" change: "inclusion" (sadly) sounds political, "innovation" is like corporate catnip. Bitwarden could be trying to attract big fish to fund development, having their cake an eating it.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago

Because the "inclusive" part is already described by the first letter's "story"?