Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance • Hacker News Board

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#201

Post by alexashka » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

Non24Throw wrote: post #160

squnch wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you have to realize that most managers have no idea why they have it so good. When so many children are starving to death worldwide, why do they live in a 4 bedroom house with a pool? Do they have exceptional talent or intelligence? No. So they fundamentally operate from a place of fear. It’s like Twitter holding onto 140 characters forever — they had no idea why they were so successful, so their approach was “d…

> If you are a heart surgeon or Lebron James you can understand why you are making so much money — you have exceptional skill at something in high demand. No need to reach for an analogy here, you could just say “if you are an engineer.” In my experience what you’re saying is rarely true at the top tech companies, the managers there generally either come from a tech background themselves or they show an unexpectedly…

The difference in top companies is the people who got in, know they have it real good, because they specifically studied leetcode for 6 months to try and get in.

Average managers didn't and so they just derp around hoping everything'll turn out alright.

Everything else is the same.

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#202

Post by _curious_ » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

evilolive wrote: post #195

_curious_ wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"where there is a single job in town" could you please point to such town in the US? Not having money to move and mouths to feed...that is whose responsibility/issue...an employers? A neighbors? Yours? Mine? And yes, they can quit if they choose to. There will be trade-offs and consequences, but they 100% absolutely can quit!

So .. can you rationalize in the same manner why the employees in the NPR story haven't quit yet? Is it cowardice? Is it because they think they can't do better than what they have?

It literally says: "Rather than download the software on her computer, she opted out."

That's all I'm saying, everyone has and makes their own choices about what they will or won't put up with. As to other article subjects , I can't/won't speak for them.

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#203

Post by eli-bryan » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:53 PM UTC

There's a researcher, Ethan Bernstein, who has looked into this quite a bit and has some great stories about the ways close monitoring can (sometimes) go sideways. He did a fascinating history of it here: https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/BernsteinE-M...

A representative anecdote re: a factory workfloor: "First the [embedded researchers] were quietly shown ‘‘better ways’’ of accomplishing tasks by their peers — a ‘‘ton of little tricks’’ that ‘‘kept production going’’ or enabled ‘‘faster, easier, and / or safer production.’’ Then they were told, ‘‘Whenever the [customers / managers / leaders] come around, don’t do that, because they’ll get mad.’’ Instead, when under observation, embeds were trained in the art of appearing to perform the task the way it was ‘‘meant’’ to be done according to the codified process rules posted for each task. Because many of these performances were not as productive as the ‘‘little tricks,’’ I observed line performance actually dropping when lines were actively supervised." From "The Transparency Paradox": https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000183921245302...

I've also interviewed a few engineers about this recently and there are plenty of horror stories. My favorite 2 quotes (from the same person) about screenshot monitoring freelancers: "It almost uniformly led to worse work..." and "... but my boss loved it." https://medium.com/@elibryan/employee-performance-tracking-d...

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#204

Post by evilolive » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:56 PM UTC

_curious_ wrote: post #200

evilolive wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you being extremely obtuse on purpose? Not everyone is an engineer who have employers fawning over them. A lot of people have few prospects of employment - especially right now - and have bills to pay. So weighing the two options : no food this month, or installing spyware willingly they take the easiest route.

"... A lot of people have few prospects of employment - especially right now - and have bills to pay." Have you considered that you may be engaging with and replying to someone who falls into this category? What makes you think I am or speaking from the POV of an engineer who has employers fawning over them? Beyond that though - why do you think that people do not have the ability to exercise their own choice in the…

So is it the case? Do you have very few prospects of employments and yet would willingly chose living in poverty over surveillance of your laptop?

I don't think it's as unlikely as you seem to believe. There are no stats being brought forward on either side, so I don't see how your scenario is less or more likely than mine. And I am merely trying to empathize with the people for whom this is the sad reality.

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#205

Post by _curious_ » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

Avicebron wrote: post #199

_curious_ wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would advise them to do what they felt was in their net best interest. Either way, they are making a conscious choice - a choice to stay and continue subjecting themselves to such treatment or a choice to leave and assume the risk. Again, would you advise them to stay and subject themselves to they type of treatment they did not agree with?

By this time I can't tell if you're deliberately misunderstanding reality to virtue signal some sort of privilege? But I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Vulnerable populations can have their employment opportunities gamed by powerful groups where they are essentially enslaved by their reliance on their paycheck to support their family, food, housing, etc. I don't understand why this doesn't register with you.

Thank you for giving me the benefit of doubt...I don't know what "virtue signal some sort of privilege" means? Does that make me dumb? Ignorant? Privileged? It could!

"Vulnerable populations can have their employment opportunities gamed by powerful groups where they are essentially enslaved by their reliance on their paycheck to support their family, food, housing, etc. I don't understand why this doesn't register with you."

Who in this article falls under your judgement of "vulnerable population"?

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#206

Post by evilolive » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

_curious_ wrote: post #202

evilolive wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So .. can you rationalize in the same manner why the employees in the NPR story haven't quit yet? Is it cowardice? Is it because they think they can't do better than what they have?

It literally says: "Rather than download the software on her computer, she opted out." That's all I'm saying, everyone has and makes their own choices about what they will or won't put up with. As to other article subjects , I can't/won't speak for them.

So you can only speak of those who serve your point?

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#207

Post by wolco » Wed, May 13, 2020, 6:59 PM UTC

crispyambulance wrote: post #96

hirako2000 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apps for auto mouse movements exist. It's also possible auto feed a stream of recorded video to the cam. If my employer automated stuff to spy on me, I would automate to feed the troll in that same manner.

Yeah, but is there a way you can tell?

wireshark

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#208

Post by pdonis » Wed, May 13, 2020, 7:03 PM UTC

pen2l wrote: post #192

iask wrote: post #12

It’s old-fashion management. If you don’t understand your employees workload and don’t trust them then either you resign or fire the employees. Simple as that. I don’t see how this makes any employee productive. This adds more stress imo. An employee gives you 8 of their 12 hour day. Now, you tell me if that works only for you - the management. They’re people just like you. They have a life just like you. They have r…

> I don’t see how this makes any employee productive. I'll contribute a counter argument, if only because I don't see it mentioned much. I'm the counter argument. Since I'm at home now, with kids, if I'm not directly on the phone with a coworker or boss, I'm likely not working. Recently our boss mandated that webcams must be on hereon-forward... before today, I would sometimes just have airpods on for the meeting but…

I think the question is what you are getting paid for. Are you getting paid for time, or are you getting paid for results?

If you're getting paid for results, then it shouldn't matter what you are doing every minute, as long as you are producing the results you are expected to produce.

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#209

Post by wolco » Wed, May 13, 2020, 7:03 PM UTC

_curious_ wrote: post #165

HumblyTossed wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but do I really have to answer these questions? How is it people still don't understand there's a huge segment of the working population who just can't up and quit a job?

Point to a single person who cannot quit their job right now?

The one supporting a family.

The one who has bills.

Someone who likes to eat.

Do you live at home still?

Re: Work-from-home boom leads to more surveillance

#210

Post by pdonis » Wed, May 13, 2020, 7:04 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #196

iask wrote: post #12

It’s old-fashion management. If you don’t understand your employees workload and don’t trust them then either you resign or fire the employees. Simple as that. I don’t see how this makes any employee productive. This adds more stress imo. An employee gives you 8 of their 12 hour day. Now, you tell me if that works only for you - the management. They’re people just like you. They have a life just like you. They have r…

There is another aspect to this. Many employees need guidance here and there. A manager told me once that he'd often find his team members working on something that wasn't the critical path, and he'd have to nudge them back on it. Every day. Team members may also be working inefficiently, and the manager observing it can help with that, too. It's not always an adversarial thing.

> Many employees need guidance here and there.

This is best done by regular check-ins, not by monitoring everything an employee does every single minute.