Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App • Hacker News Board

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#121

Post by anigbrowl » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:36 PM UTC

VLM wrote: post #34

harmegido wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced by your argument. People freely give away this information and more to facebook, etc.

But not in one giant queryable SQL table. I'd worry about parallelized spearfishing attacks across multiple stores, "Good Morning DEF, have I reached store number 12345 cash handling office? OK good to hear, this ABC at walmart corporate IT calling back about that trouble ticket your coworker XYZ entered about your store in Springfield, is XYZ at work now? Oh OK, well, anyway the ticket says XYZ is having trouble acc…

If you're that worried about it send an email to the union and claim an hour of pro-bono consultancy on your tax return. I don't know your motivations but this looks awfully like concern trolling.

Incidentally I'm not a union member, nor have I ever been. I just find it really odd to see a firm like Walmart being so 'concerned' about the security of their employees while at the same time shoving all sorts of electronic gadgets at their customers without the slightest murmur about the security issues. Does Walmart give the same kind of security advice to customers or employees who purchase smartphones? If not, then why would I take their sudden concern at face value here?

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#122

Post by randomdata » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:38 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #119

randomdata wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny part is that not a single reply to my comment (so far) touched on any of the points being made, which was entirely about definitions of terms, but rather continued with the same tired and emotionally fueled talking points every union discussion has. I have to wonder if anyone actually read my comment, or just saw the word union and started replying with their stock responses.

Or it could be because they weren't very good points. At best, I read it as indulging in not-very-good word games, which is a distraction from a serious topic. Or if you're making a serious point, it doesn't seem like you understand either the practicalities of union negotiating or the economic theory that justifies them. If you're going to jump into a discussion that you know is emotional for people, then you should…

> it doesn't seem like you understand either the practicalities of union negotiating or the economic theory that justifies them.

My comment emphasized the need for unions, so if you disagree with my points, are you saying that unions aren't necessary?

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#123

Post by jimmywanger » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:39 PM UTC

cryptarch wrote: post #83

jimmywanger wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowhere did he say that "facebook couldn't query user data". He's saying that it's probably not in a form that's easily queryable. With that information in an ill-secured data store that's highly categorized you can do all sorts of mischief. And how is it FUD? Once you cleanse and normalize data, fraud opportunities become very apparent.

It sounds a lot like "I assume FB has good data practices based on nothing, and I assume this app has bad data practices based on nothing, thus this app is probably bad". Yeah, the app has an option to fill in your store ID, but Facebook has at least as valuable data on you (like many private conversations), and has the tooling to extract all kinds of markers from this rich data (i.e. for advertising and running faci…

> "I assume FB has good data practices based on nothing, and I assume this app has bad data practices based on nothing, thus this app is probably bad".

That is a strawman. FB probably has decent (at least industry standard) data practices because they're a public company, spend a lot of money on hiring engineers, and have been under investigation for keeping data secure. I think that if they're doing something wrong, they're probably not doing something obviously stupid.

Now, you have another app which was written by "Now, Marler has a second job: She’s one of about two dozen current and former employees who helped construct an app called WorkIt that answers questions about Walmart’s policies and workplace rights using Watson, IBM’s artificial intelligence bot."

I'm not saying that this app is bad, I'm saying that they have a huge probability of overlooking data security vulnerabilities. Of their two dozen employees, how many of them are really well versed in inf sec or IT?

The belief that FB has good data practices and there are no assurances that another random app has unknown data practices is rooted in reality.

The fact that the random act is asking for so much possible PII is not a good sign.

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#124

Post by randomdata » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:40 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #108

randomdata wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I agree that fairness and freedom is the problem here. That's literally what the whole comment was about. A union helps take away fairness and freedom so that the employees benefit.

You are assuming your premise as your conclusion.

Well, that's the topic at hand. If the premise needs discussion, we can discuss it.

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#125

Post by TheDong » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:41 PM UTC

jimmywanger wrote: post #42

btown wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Locked down racks" is complete FUD. It's not like there's HIPAA or PCI compliance issues here. Incompetently managed bare metal servers are just as hackable, perhaps more so, than incompetently used cloud IaaS. Workers should be careful, but storage has absolutely nothing to do with this.

> "Locked down racks" is complete FUD. That was my point. I'd much rather have them Amazon boys or Google boys take care of my data than my own sysadmin team - the Amazon/Google sysadmins are sharp, they apply all patches, and they have procedures in place to make sure they don't do anything incredibly stupid. The fact they don't mention how they store any of this information that could have potential career altering…

What you're saying is even more FUD though.

Using AWS EC2 or GCE's compute doesn't mean you aren't responsible for sysadmining. You still have to patch your boxes, you still have not do incredibly stupid things.

The actual security difference between servers on a rack and virtual machines in a cloud is roughly a dozen ip-tables rules (security groups).

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#126

Post by moron4hire » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:45 PM UTC

bunderbunder wrote: post #109

mannykannot wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even under the current administration, enforcement is weak, and it will probably be weaker under the next administration. One of the more interesting features of the American political environment, over at least the last three and a half decades, is the extent to which the demographic that is (or was) nominally represented by unions has voted for politicians who have made no bones about their intent to weaken the u…

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." - Steinbeck

Ronald Wright, not Steinbeck.

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#127

Post by jonathankoren » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:46 PM UTC

randomdata wrote: post #88

danharaj wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going over the same basic points over and over again might be a better conversation, but it's always the same comversation, which gets tiresome.

The funny part is that not a single reply to my comment (so far) touched on any of the points being made, which was entirely about definitions of terms, but rather continued with the same tired and emotionally fueled talking points every union discussion has. I have to wonder if anyone actually read my comment, or just saw the word union and started replying with their stock responses.

Your comment hinges on the idea that exploitive labor practices do not exist. Allow me to make the prediction that you also don't believe that a market for lemons exists. I also, will go so far as to say that you actually no real connection to this, but rather are spouting off about abstract ideals and philosophy from your upper middle class existence, rather than actually being informed about the actual reality of the matter.

We know that Walmart forces employees to work off the clock. They've settled multiple class-action lawsuits about this. This of course, goes by a name. It's called wage theft. Even before the theft, we know that Walmart pays their employee literally poverty wages. This is evident this time a year, when you go to a Walmart and see a barrel sitting out front marked for food donations for Walmart employees. On top of that, Walmart is essentially government subsidized, because they encourage their employees to sign up for welfare as part of their on-boarding process.[0]

So now of course, why would anyone put up with this? Quite simply, there's no other choice. Yeah, these people are unskilled and left far behind in the economy, but that doesn't mean that someone with a full time job should live in poverty. This doesn't mean that a multibillion dollar multinational megacorp, should be getting 6 billion dollars a year in taxpayer payroll subsidies.

[0] http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-w...

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#128

Post by darpa_escapee » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:48 PM UTC

randomdata wrote: post #64

darpa_escapee wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same company that shows employees videos that are equivalent to "Unions = bad, yuck, gross, not even once" during training. They have every incentive to prevent unionization. If workers have room to negotiate, that means they could negotiate for fair compensation. Reminder that our country's labor history is rife with straight up mass murder of workers because they demanded fair pay, safe working conditio…

> they could negotiate for fair compensation. What, exactly, is unfair about the current compensation? Walmart pays exactly what they and the employee agreed to at the onset of the employment agreement. Those who couldn't reach an agreement have do not provide work for Walmart at all. I really don't know how you can get any more fair than that? Everyone equally has the ability to decide what works for them and are fr…

> What, exactly, is unfair about the current compensation? Walmart pays exactly what they and the employee agreed to at the onset of the employment agreement. Those who couldn't reach an agreement have do not provide work for Walmart at all.

On one side of the table, there is Walmart: a large group of well-monied people that pay lawyers, lobbyists, PR teams and think-tanks to level the playing field in their favor.

On the other side, there is you: an individual person who can only bring their time and skill to the table and needs to eat.

Unorganized labor is great for Walmart. If you don't like their terms, there is a large pool of qualified applicants that will take whatever employment they can get.

If Walmart's terms aren't really that great for everybody, where huge swaths of people are not being paid fair market compensation for their productivity then, individually, workers have no option for change.

> I really don't know how you can get any more fair than that? Everyone equally has the ability to decide what works for them and are free to move on when it doesn't work.

People are not being paid fair market compensation for their work that they would be if they were able to bargain collectively the way Walmart is able to. An individual has little recourse against the might of many people who want to pay them as little as possible.

If capital is allowed to consolidate wealth and power into a corporation, labor should be able to collectively negotiate with it. Unions can serve to to bridge the gap of uneven power at negotiations.

> A union has no bargaining power if it has competition, of course.

A union is under the same market forces as anybody else. If it has competition, it must compete.

> A union actually takes away a worker's room to negotiate

Depends on the union. Some allow for negotiation, some have a scale which you can work with.

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#129

Post by rayiner » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:48 PM UTC

darpa_escapee wrote: post #46

microcolonel wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not interfering with the right to bargain collectively though. For all we know, they're genuinely warning their employees that they may be involved in a PII collection scam. They can't reprimand/dismiss you for using the app, but surely they can tell you it's unwise. I don't see why people are so quick to tie Wal-Mart to the pyre; for what they pay, their employees are satisfied to an outsized degree. Given t…

This is the same company that shows employees videos that are equivalent to "Unions = bad, yuck, gross, not even once" during training. They have every incentive to prevent unionization. If workers have room to negotiate, that means they could negotiate for fair compensation. Reminder that our country's labor history is rife with straight up mass murder of workers because they demanded fair pay, safe working conditio…

> massive profits.

Wal-Mart's profit margin is about 5%.

Re: Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

#130

Post by afarrell » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

mannykannot wrote: post #100

Animats wrote: post #11

It's an illegal labor practice in the US for an employer to do that. It's interference with the right to bargain collectively. But WalMart probably doesn't have much to fear from the Labor Department. Even under the current administration, enforcement is weak, and it will probably be weaker under the next administration. It's really tough to organize a union today, even though the law as written is pro-union.

> Even under the current administration, enforcement is weak, and it will probably be weaker under the next administration. One of the more interesting features of the American political environment, over at least the last three and a half decades, is the extent to which the demographic that is (or was) nominally represented by unions has voted for politicians who have made no bones about their intent to weaken the u…

When my uncle worked in a logistics center as a person-who-lifts-and-moves-stuff, he complained about the labor union rules that imposed a bunch of inefficiencies.