Live data from Hacker News

WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

privacyinternational.org

181–190 of 367 posts

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#181
I guarantee that all large enterprises that can legally get away with it, will soon start monitoring everything electronic their employees do using LLMs.

Everything you write in an email or say in a Teams meeting will be transcribed and read. The LLM will be instructed to check that you’re “compliant with corporate communications policy.”

Sounds innocuous, right? Just stop employees leaking PII or swearing at customers.

It’ll be expanded to also detect employees that are trying to form a union, questioning safety, revealing management malfeasance, or whistleblowing.

For these people, 1984 was a guidebook.

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Good businesses should only care if work is getting accomplished. This always comes across as people wanting to have the cake and eat it. Employers should only care that the work is getting done, but if the work isn't done, then the employee should still be able to go home after 8 hours and get full salary?

If the work is not getting done, spying on people isn’t going to improve things. If you want people to work, you have to properly motivate them. That means fair wages and non-toxic management.

So you are assuming that if someone is not doing a good job, it is because they are paid unfairly and/or in a toxic env ? Thats a lot of assumption. How about the deadbeats ? Do they exist or not ?

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Quit the bad ones, join the good ones. This is why universal income is extremely important, so that people can pursue better jobs without risking being vulnerable.

Some people don’t want to work. They’ve told me so. I think UBI would destroy these people, like easy wealth does to the newly rich. A better solution is to focus on worker’s rights and labor regulations. Of course that opens the internationalism question, but so too would ubi.

I used to be employed in a community where the vast majority of people collected welfare and did not work.

Except that most of the people who did not work actually did work. They would hunt for food, chop fire wood, haul their garbage to the dump, cook their own food, raise their own children, and do the many other things that are necessary to live.

I'm not saying that they type of person you describe does not exist. They do. Some of them lived in the very community I described. I am saying that because we tend to have a very specific, and peculiar, idea of what work means. We almost universally mean working for another. It doesn't much matter whether we are an employer or an employee, the product of that work is typically meant for someone outside of our family, social circles, and community. At the same time we dismiss any form of labour that isn't based upon some sort of transaction, the type of labour that is central to the health of both families and communities. Our culture has these notions so entrenched that the lack of a "proper job" does destroy people, psychologically. Not only is one's sense of value lost, but the value of other types of relationships is greatly diminished.

I don't really see worker rights or labour regulations as a complete solution since we are dealing with a problem that is stitched into the fabric of our society. Likewise, UBI is not a complete solution. If we were to dive into UBI today, which is about providing for people's basic needs from our surpluses (it is not about providing easy wealth), some people would be destroyed because we have never put much thought into what it means to live without there being some sort of transaction. We have never put much thought into what a non-authoritarian workplace would look like. We have never put much thought into what we need and our relationship with society as a whole.

The question that I have trouble answering is how can we build the foundation of a society where we aren't simply asking whether we work to live or live to work? A society where people's needs are met without coercion. A world where people want to contribute to a more egalitarian society.

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#185
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They ain't desirable. But who wants to pay them do nothing? Many people ain't happy to cover existing welfare. Increase welfare and even more people would feel it's unfair.

You can accuse UBI of many things but unfair it is clearly not, hence the "universal". Everyone gets the same amount - but the assumption is most will then choose to work and earn extra income on top of that.

>it is clearly not, hence the "universal"

Yet nobody has ever proposed a version of UBI that is truly universal. It's always limited to a certain in-group. This incentivizes the in-group to stretch the most out of their UBI: that is outsource all menial work to a permanent underclass of immigrants who don't receive free government money, which is exactly what happens in Saudi Arabia.

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#186
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep moving those goalposts.

> Goalposts You literally said "output" the most speculative / vague definition of "work" available. I appreciate programmers / "creatives" "output" is much harder to measure, but there are alot of jobs where "mouse moving", "words per second" is a very reliable indicator of "output".

Almost no jobs are meaningfully measured in such a fashion because it penalizes thinking at the expense of spinning your wheels even when latter is far less or even negative in value if it wastes other employees time as well. It also fails to capture any relationship between input and output. If all you care about is butts in seats you can bill someone else for there productivity means nothing all you want is someone to take as long as possible to produce a level of output the client will pay for.

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#187
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "basic" in basic income isn't there for decoration: just taking UBI and not working would probably be about as comfortable as living on something like Universal Credit in the UK, minus the adversarial means-testing, which is to say, "not very". Certainly I wouldn't characterise it as "easy wealth", more like "easy bare minimum so you don't have to worry about starvation". Besides, if it was that much gloriously e…

How is means testing adversarial?

Adversarial as well as means-tested, I should have said. The Universal Credit system is famously cruel in how it is designed.

Not least it is paid in arrears and is designed to take 6 weeks to get the first (backdated) payment, by which time anyone who actually needs it is already likely to be overdrawn to the tune of a month's rent and utilities.

https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2022/10/universal-cre...

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/universal-credit-chaos...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/universal-cr...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/government-benefit-sa...

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#188
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a concept equivalent to US, salary employee? If so what are they expected to work?

(I’m from Europe, have lived in US the past 8 years) > Is there a concept equivalent to US, salary employee? Yes. It’s called full-time employee. This encompasses anyone and everyone who does not work as an independent contractor. > If so what are they expected to work? 40 hours per week. With mandated minimum lunch time and breaks, paid minimum vacation, paid medical leave, paid maternity/paternity, govt mandated lu…

"Salary" or "exempt" in the US is a sub-status of "Full Time Employee". FTE in the US has much of the same of what you say - less, but still some protections, most significantly requirements around paying overtime, and paying more for it: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime - "Unless exempt, employees covered by the Act must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate not less than time and one-half their regular rates of pay."

Salary = exempt = no overtime for you, sucker. Over time, more and more people have fallen under that category in the US.

Is there something like that in the EU, where you don't have max hours or overtime eligibility at all?

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Quit the bad ones, join the good ones. This is why universal income is extremely important, so that people can pursue better jobs without risking being vulnerable.

Some people don’t want to work. They’ve told me so. I think UBI would destroy these people, like easy wealth does to the newly rich. A better solution is to focus on worker’s rights and labor regulations. Of course that opens the internationalism question, but so too would ubi.

Free money is never going to solve anything. I don't mind helping people in need but just handing out money to people especially the ones that are already lazy wouldn't solve a thing.

Instead, we should focus on getting people to work. Whatever that takes. We should reward those who want to work and penalize those who don't. If you can't work due to a real disability, you should be helped.

Re: WFH – Watched from Home: Office 365 and workplace surveillance creep (2022)

#190

I run a couple essential apps in a Virtualbox on my work laptop. Mainly due to compatability but more and more so due to privacy and articles like this. Am I right in thinking that anything that goes on inside that Virtualbox is 'relatively' private? I don't believe our IT department have the capacity to go beyond something like Office 365 Admin, but who knows. Thanks,

I’ve always thought it was a good rule that if you don’t want your employer to know about it, don’t do it on a company machine. Assume they can see everything.

I'm not sure why you are being downvoted, this is totally logical
Post reply on HN