Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control

Post by cm2187 » Fri, Mar 31, 2017, 7:04 AM UTC

throwaway287391 wrote: post #28

hackuser wrote: post #18

Isn't the obvious solution to ban personal phones, or personal apps, at work? It's not hard.

Do you honestly think that's a feasible solution? Who in their right mind would work for a company that doesn't allow them to bring their personal phone to work? Unless it were required by law, no company would do that to their white collar employees -- they'd all leave for a company that doesn't treat them like eight year olds. (I feel like this would never be suggested on HN if we were discussing software companies…

Post by ForHackernews » Fri, Mar 31, 2017, 7:26 AM UTC

throwaway287391 wrote: post #28

hackuser wrote: post #18

Isn't the obvious solution to ban personal phones, or personal apps, at work? It's not hard.

Do you honestly think that's a feasible solution? Who in their right mind would work for a company that doesn't allow them to bring their personal phone to work? Unless it were required by law, no company would do that to their white collar employees -- they'd all leave for a company that doesn't treat them like eight year olds. (I feel like this would never be suggested on HN if we were discussing software companies…

Post by lz400 » Fri, Mar 31, 2017, 7:49 AM UTC

throwaway287391 wrote: post #28

hackuser wrote: post #18

Isn't the obvious solution to ban personal phones, or personal apps, at work? It's not hard.

Do you honestly think that's a feasible solution? Who in their right mind would work for a company that doesn't allow them to bring their personal phone to work? Unless it were required by law, no company would do that to their white collar employees -- they'd all leave for a company that doesn't treat them like eight year olds. (I feel like this would never be suggested on HN if we were discussing software companies…

Post by mirimir » Fri, Mar 31, 2017, 8:05 AM UTC

dwaltrip wrote: post #46

humbledrone wrote: post #3

"Wall Street's Restaurant Secret: Illegal Talking over Lunch is Out of Control" > Dirty jokes and NSFW GIFs. Snaps of unsuspecting colleagues on the trading floor. Screenshots of confidential client positions. > All that -- and, on occasion, even legally dubious information -- is increasingly being trafficked over the new private lines of Wall Street: street-level restaurants like McDonalds and Taco Bell. > “They’re…

Oh c'mon. Encrypted messaging apps are orders of magnitude more efficient and discreet for communication in the context of the overall finance industry, compared to "talking over lunch" (or any other meatspace location). Not sure I have any well formulated thoughts about the significance of this trend among finance types... but I don't think your analogy is terribly illuminating.

Post by izacus » Fri, Mar 31, 2017, 8:46 AM UTC

johncolanduoni wrote: post #13

phreack wrote: post #5

So people have private ways to communicate, and sometimes they break the law by communicating forbidden stuff, hasn't that been a thing for ages? Why the sudden hate on Whatsapp, if there's a rise of law breaking messages, the root cause is elsewhere.

Because the previous ways of communicating while working for a company with a compliance department that are hard to subpoena weren't on hundreds of millions of people's cell phones? Not saying that means the law should go after WhatsApp or it's WhatsApp's fault (I would strongly argue against both), but that doesn't mean it being made easier and deniability becoming more plausible isn't the cause.