Live data from Hacker News

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

privacyinternational.org

241–250 of 367 posts

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

#241

Every time one of these stories comes out I sigh a little and conclude that it's more showing the failure of modern management practices and the legal environments these companies are required to operate in than anything about employee responsibility. Companies should be judging their people by results. If someone's performance is acceptable then all of these surveillance metrics don't matter. If someone's performanc…

This is a naive take imo, especially in a small business where you're signing checks from your personal bank account to your employees. When I'm paying someone for work out of my own pocket, I'm going to make sure that they're reaching peak productivity. I don't know why this expectation wouldn't exist at a larger company as well. Two things can be true at once: my employee can be delivering good results, and my empl…

I don't understand your objection. I also run a business. I also pay people to do things for that business. The amount of money that eventually reaches my personal bank account does depend on the performance of the business and that in turn does depend on how much we pay people and how good a job they do for us.

So I care very much about whether they get those jobs done well. But I couldn't care less how much time they spend with their backside in a chair or how many messages they sent last week or whether they took a 1h30 lunch break yesterday because they went out shopping for a birthday present for their kid.

I default to trusting people working for us to be honest and do their job to an acceptable standard. I'm only interested in intervening if that isn't happening. In that case the kind of metrics under discussion here aren't going to help me figure out the real problem and how we can fix it. They aren't even likely to be worth much if as a last resort we do have to lose someone who can't get the job done properly and later we have to defend that decision in some kind of dispute proceeding.

This isn't to say we can't give feedback and provide training to help anyone working for us to perform better. But I don't see what relevance these kinds of metrics have to that either. I've always found talking with people openly about how things are going to be far more effective. YMMV.

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

#242
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 know, it's not just labor that contributes to economic output. Natural resources and accumulated knowledge and technology contribute too. Both belong to everyone with equal share. Giving people what their share of resources and technology has produced is only fair.

How does anyone have any claim to 'their share' of resources without any input? Just by being in existence, they deserve to consume natural resources / technology? I don't see how that makes sense.

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

#243
post #171

Honestly lots of people are doing miminal hours WFH, not just IT, all office workers. I think companies really dont know what to do about it.

Let them discover just how little work is done when people are in the office. So many people who are professional water cooler talkers. Few people are putting in a full eight hours a day.

Lol I definitely worked less in the Office. I know it looked like I worked more. I kinda miss that sometimes.

With remote work I have to actually have done something.

In the office I just had to show up and sometimes that’s all I want to do.

Don’t get me wrong I much prefer WFH. But I do wish I could just show up and have that be enough some days.

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

#244
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A just and civil society being one where the harder I work, the more taxes I pay? Where stores are closing right and left because theft isn’t prosecuted but I have to pay $7,000 to get a bathroom permitted while an RV on the street outside my house is considered a home and gets to dump shit on the street with no repercussions?

Sucks that some people have no better choice than to live in an RV and dump their shit on the street. Sorry about the cost of your bathroom addition though.

If you ask around here in Seattle, many of them will tell you they came here for the free stuff. They do have a choice.

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

#245

Nearly 20 years ago we used to install monitoring software to tell if a user's mouse or keyboard hadn't been used in a while. More and more places use traffic inspection "for security". Desks now use sensors to tell when warm bodies are near. Doesn't matter whether you're working from office or in the home, surveillance is here to stay. Good businesses should only care if work is getting accomplished. Bad businesses…

> Good businesses should only care if work is getting accomplished.

Goodhart's Law (HN might be annoyed at how often I reference this)

Goodhart's Law isn't just about that setting a metric as a target leads to that metric being exploited, but is more about how difficult things are to measure and evaluate. The lesson to be learned here is that measurements should only ever be considered as indicators at best, and usually as weak signals.

Proper evaluation requires significant nuance, exceptions to the rules, and care. It requires being human: messy, a bit chaotic, and inconsistent. There's good reason for our desire for good metrics. It can help make things fair, consistent, reduce bias, and help control for bad actors. There is that appeal to act mechanically, as machines are often highly interpretable and controllable. But over-reliance on metrics end up with the exact same results. Humans will always exploit a metric. Humans aren't machines. Hell, AI always exploits metrics (which creates a big irony that there's so much benchmarkism in the field). For this reason meritocracy can never exist, as unbiased metrics and evaluations can never exist. Doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it, but rather that we need to think slow and with care. Unfortunately, our brain is lazy and wants to think fast and on autopilot. An irony with how often HN references Kahneman's book. The most human thing we can do is actually override our autopilot, as that's what differentiates us from the other animals and machines.

Good businesses should only care if work is getting accomplished. That's hard to measure. But one needs to recognize this rather than chase mechanistic one-size-fits-all metrics. You need to embrace the chaos to navigate it. Set guidelines, not rules. Managers and business owners, take heed.

> surveillance is here to stay

I'm unconvinced. This happens because there is little to no pushback because people are convinced that the hierarchical structures are too powerful. But as I said above to embrace the chaos, this too is how you can attack these structures. I talked about this longer in another thread, but remember that you're <6 steps from any person. Ideas spread like viruses (memes), and the control only exists when we stop talking and communicating. If we self censor (e.g. are afraid to tell others our salaries because we think they'll be mad at us instead of the person that controls the pay) then the hierarchy has too much power. Hierarchies are good, but power gets abused. It isn't good for your business to have that power abused. But it also requires care: to not chase short term gains but think long term and remain fluid (environments change. Adapt or die).

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

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, it's not just labor that contributes to economic output. Natural resources and accumulated knowledge and technology contribute too. Both belong to everyone with equal share. Giving people what their share of resources and technology has produced is only fair.

How does anyone have any claim to 'their share' of resources without any input? Just by being in existence, they deserve to consume natural resources / technology? I don't see how that makes sense.

> How does anyone have any claim to 'their share' of resources without any input?

Counterpoint: not a single person born was asked to be put here. None. Every one of us was put here because 2 people chose to have sex (with or without consent) and left us as a result.

To that original sin of non-consent, the least those already here owe us is the minimum to live, without any "input".

> Just by being in existence, they deserve to consume natural resources / technology? I don't see how that makes sense.

The sun provides nearly limitless energy. Natural resources can be used to make things. The 'free' resources are already there. To say that every human gets a 'share' of resources upon birth isn't exactly a foreign thought, either. The richie's with trust funds get this... But somehow daddy dearest having others work hard for him means he benefits.

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

#247

So we need to create mechanical robots typing text generated by LLMs on a keyboard to look like we are working at the 100% utilization all the time (probably costing <$100 these days based on robotic hand prices). Then some solution for facial recognition if a webcam is needed.

You don't need a mechanical robot for that. Just need a device masquerading as a keyboard just sending that stuff in.

you can already do this with a flipper zero + badusb.

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

#248

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.

Work and labor are 2 different things. And I would never 'work' either, if it weren't for hanging starvation and destitution over my head.

Labor - I build a fence for my home, or fix plumbing, or make miniatures, or do cool stuff. I and those around me benefit from my labor. I may help a friend move. Or help to do light construction, or networking. Again, we benefit.

Work is labor where someone else takes the lion's share of the labor and keeps the surplus, where you nearly never see the result and keep scraps of your worth. You'll never see your 'worth', and all attempts will be made to hide it. The 'who' whom gets this massive surplus is the company you work for. Lots of hand-wavey reasons will be made why your share is low.

I have no problem with labor. I and those around me benefit. Work is exploitative and serves to make someone else richer at my, my family's, and my friends expense.

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

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What leads you to believe that people who do not want to work are desirable to have in the workplace? UBI also doesn't give you wealth, it gives you basics, and overal that's much cheaper than dragging down an entire team or department. At the same time, we currently have plenty of people who do not want to work and do indeed not work, that will not change regardless of what you implement. I also think that happy and…

It's hard to infer someone's particular motivations. I'd rather work with code that was carefully crafted than something that was nervously hammered away at while looking over their shoulder just to catch a breath.
Post reply on HN