Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 180 posts

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#81

Post by reaperducer »

pmoriarty wrote: post #64
emptyparadise wrote: post #4

Feels like every damn thing that happens gets used as a pretext to enable more and more surveillance. Will we need job boards specifically for jobs that don't do surveillance too? >Last year Fujitsu, a Japanese technology group, unveiled AI software which promises to gauge employees’ concentration based on their facial expression. Just need software that punishes employees who aren't happy enough at work, then we'll…

"Will we need job boards specifically for jobs that don't do surveillance too?" Are there jobs that don't do surveillance? Seems like every company's jumping in head first.

Are there jobs that don't do surveillance?

Try front-line and front-line-adjacent healthcare. Due to federal privacy laws, a lot of ordinary office surveillance tech is not permitted.

It's not uncommon for regular offices to have "security" cameras. But when IT tried to put the cameras all over our building, the legal department told them to go stick their heads in a pig.

I wasn't part of the discussions that followed, but based on my company's privacy training, I can imagine a couple of problems:

- Legal didn't want even the remote possibility that a "security" camera might be able to view a patient's records on someone's screen.

- Legal didn't want any record that a particular patient went into a particular office, thus identifying them as having a particular ailment. (It's the same reason all of our promotional flyers sent in the mail have to be in a plain white envelope, and not postcards announcing to the world "You're overdue for your herpes follow-up!")

There are still security cameras, but they're only allowed in the employee parking lot. And I think I've seen them in the server rooms. But that's pretty much it.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#82

Post by palisade »

I worked at a place once where we got a memo that asked everyone to stop clipping nails and farting because the microphones installed in our desks were picking these noises up. The memo even added that if you need to fart please go to the bathroom. It wasn't a joke email, they were serious.

Oh, also not many people realize this but CCTV cameras all have the capability to convey audio captured via an internal microphone. It just depends on whether they have hooked the wires up to enable this feature. But, the innate ability is there. And, the CCTV software the guards use have the ability to store, retrieve and play this back alongside the video playback.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#83

Post by jka »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #43
jka wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a manager, would you worry about the stability of your own job role if you didn't have insight into the productivity of your reports? Would you worry what would happen to you and the company if one of your reports introduced a serious bug or security flaw into the software? (note: I think these concerns can -- and should -- be addressed in other ways that don't require intrusion into employees' day-to-day activiti…

>but I raise them because I think they're part of the reason (along with compliance, perhaps in some cases?) why these systems are introduced in the first place Problem is, they are still proxies. Proxies are great at satisfying feelings, but proxies are by no means a guarantee they will reflect what they try to capture. There are no end of examples of perverse incentives showcasing how a metric can "feel" great, but…

> Other than that, even thinking along the terms of "well they must have a reason" is a great way of introducing slippery slopes all the way to extremism.

It's possible I misunderstand what you're saying here, but I think I agree; I wasn't intending to justify managerial surveillance, only to understand and elaborate why it might be happening.

Without understanding the cause(s), the tendency of organizations will, I'd guess, instead be to patch over any problems that arise -- the process equivalent of adding warning signs instead of fixing a dangerous bridge.

The solution in an effective employment marketplace is to build organizations that avoid the root causes entirely and thus attract (effective, motivated) employees and build desire in others to work at similar workplaces -- while perhaps reducing organizational running costs at the same time as a side-effect.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#84

Post by pmoriarty »

reaperducer wrote: post #81
pmoriarty wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Will we need job boards specifically for jobs that don't do surveillance too?" Are there jobs that don't do surveillance? Seems like every company's jumping in head first.

Are there jobs that don't do surveillance? Try front-line and front-line-adjacent healthcare. Due to federal privacy laws, a lot of ordinary office surveillance tech is not permitted. It's not uncommon for regular offices to have "security" cameras. But when IT tried to put the cameras all over our building, the legal department told them to go stick their heads in a pig. I wasn't part of the discussions that followe…

They probably also didn't want video evidence when their doctors or nurses screw up, which would make malpractice cases against them stronger.

Video evidence could also exonerate them, of course. But they probably erred on the side of opacity and the status quo over more transparency, as ass-covering corporations often do.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#85

Post by SethMurphy »

hutzlibu wrote: post #18
SethMurphy wrote: post #8

Don't forget the home. With the ubiquity of security cameras privacy is eroding even in private. I am struggling now with properly placing cameras in an apartment and balancing safety, security, and privacy in a family environment.

Why do you want to place cameras in your apartment in the first place? Maybe one camera for the entrance, if you have reasons to be paranoid (I was thinking about it for myself, because of weird landlord with second keys), but why more cameras? edit: one further reason for myself I remembered, watching the small kids from the smartphone, while going out for some minutes. But in the end I never set it up

1. Security

I live in a leased ground level floor through apartment with three entrances not including 6 accessible windows. In order to cover an entrance from inside some of the living space would need to be included. To fully cover I would need 5 cameras and have them in bedrooms too. Exterior cameras could help, but I have no authority to install. While I have no specific reason to worry, I wouldn't want my landlord to install them and be able to see what/who comes in and out of the apartment and/or raise the rent because of it.

Even just covering the 2 main entrances I find it uncomfortable to be able to know when my spouse is entering/exiting the home, I trust them.

2. Kids When you need it you need it. Like when I was isolating with covid. However it is their privacy I am concerned also as I don't want them to think it's OK to be surveilled.

3. Safety Did I leave the stove on? Not so important, but since one entrance is a galley kitchen I easily monitor this and the rear entrance.

Is the basement flooding? This is actually a big one for me. Installing one here however would mean potentially spying on the landlord which I would not do without explicit permission.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#86

Post by SethMurphy »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #23
hutzlibu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you want to place cameras in your apartment in the first place? Maybe one camera for the entrance, if you have reasons to be paranoid (I was thinking about it for myself, because of weird landlord with second keys), but why more cameras? edit: one further reason for myself I remembered, watching the small kids from the smartphone, while going out for some minutes. But in the end I never set it up

Catching acts of domestic violence would be a reason. To prevent he said/she said instances. NB: I don't agree with the increasing paranoia, it's just devil's advocate.

Hadn't thought of that one. If domestic violence is between young brothers, this may be useful.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#87

Post by maxfurman »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #59
imranq wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is getting a job so competitive? Last I heard there was a labor shortage

There's a shortage of people willing to work in terrible conditions. I'd usually add "for a pittance," but I see FAANG (is it now "MAANG"?) companies offering pretty insane salaries, but they are notorious for difficult working conditions.

I've seen "MANGA" lately, but everyone still knows what you mean by FAANG

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#88

Post by pluc »

Get this. I worked for the company that produces most of the porn on the Internet. You know, the porn you can go to any torrent site and download for free within 10 minutes (and that statement has been true for as long as there has been an Internet and BitTorrent).

That company periodically took screenshots of all (ALL!) their employees' workstations. They monitor internal network for suspicious traffic and, until COVID happened, they did not let anyone work remotely.

Never understood what they were afraid of. Their content is already plastered all over the Internet.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#89

Post by chazu »

headsoup wrote: post #70
derwiki wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything about their employees is monitored and tracked, down to individual finger and eye movements, to prevent waste and track performance. All emails that are sent out include an estimate of how long they should take to read. Go to fast, you get scolded for not paying attention. Go too slow, you get scolded for inefficiency. Get it just right? You get scolded for being a smartass. —- Snowcrash

'The “robot” installed at this first Burger-G restaurant looked nothing like the robots of popular culture. It was not hominid like C-3PO or futuristic like R2-D2 or industrial like an assembly line robot. Instead it was simply a PC sitting in the back corner of the restaurant running a piece of software. The software was called “Manna”, version 1.0*.'

That story was truly a horrific vision of the future.

Re: Welcome to the era of the hyper-surveilled office

#90

Post by pmoriarty »

bwestergard wrote: post #79

I'm a software developer working remotely most of the time. My unionized colleagues and I pushed for and won an agreement to prevent our employer from surveilling us in this manner. Several other recently organized companies have gotten similar agreements. https://twitter.com/WeBuildNPR/status/1522586389774221313?cx...

INAL, but it seems that the wording in the agreement leaves open the use of surveillance software on employees, as long as it's not for the purpose of "evaluating the employee's work product (i.e. job duties assigned to the employee), the time an employee took to complete their work, or disciplining an employee in protected concerted activity."

The company could still use such software on employees and claim it was doing so for security purposes, for instance, or maybe even just to make sure the employee was working (without evaluating the work product).

Why not prohibit the user of such software on employees entirely?

Post reply on HN