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

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

privacyinternational.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 367 posts

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

#321

Post by lelanthran »

planede wrote: post #319
lelanthran wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's unfair is to take away someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Did I say otherwise?

No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither?

> No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither?

Me agreeing that taking away

> someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job.

Is not the same as me agreeing that all welfare systems are unfair (You're only considering unemployment welfare payments. There's others).

I don't understand how you can confuse the two.

It's possible to have what almost everyone would consider a fair welfare system.

It's not possible to have what even a significant minority would consider to be a fair UBI system.

Welfare systems have a goal of ensuring that people who need more get more.

UBI has the goal of ensuring that no one gets more than anyone else.

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

#322

Post by [deleted] »

lelanthran wrote: post #321
planede wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither?

> No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither? Me agreeing that taking away > someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Is not the same as me agreeing that all welfare systems are unfair (You're only considering unemployment welfare payments. There's others). I don't understand how you can confuse the two. It's possible to have what almost everyone would…

[deleted]

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

#323

Post by planede »

lelanthran wrote: post #321
planede wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither?

> No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither? Me agreeing that taking away > someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Is not the same as me agreeing that all welfare systems are unfair (You're only considering unemployment welfare payments. There's others). I don't understand how you can confuse the two. It's possible to have what almost everyone would…

UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO.

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

#324

Post by lelanthran »

planede wrote: post #323
lelanthran wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. But then if UBI is unfair and welfare is unfair, then what's fair? Providing neither? Me agreeing that taking away > someone's welfare once they finally land a minimal pay job. Is not the same as me agreeing that all welfare systems are unfair (You're only considering unemployment welfare payments. There's others). I don't understand how you can confuse the two. It's possible to have what almost everyone would…

UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO.

> UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO.

Another welfare system in addition to the existing welfare system is quite undesirable for most proponents of UBI who (like the parent I responded to earlier) present "no other welfare system" as a benefit of UBI.

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

#325

Post by bombolo »

itsboring wrote: post #233
bombolo wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your actual contribution to society? I'm going to assume you work at some useless startup (like most of us) that will be gone in a few years, having left nothing useful to society. Is your work really helping society?

What, you’re not “Making the World a Better Place through Paxos algorithms for consensus protocols”? In seriousness, I wish there was more self-awareness like this in our field.

Remember when every startup was claiming to make the world a better place?

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

#326

Post by clarkmcc »

Silhouette wrote: post #241
clarkmcc wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

Hey good on you if you’re signing over paychecks to employees that leave work to go shopping or take extended lunch breaks. Apparently I just don’t have that kind of cash to spend on non-productivity. I care very much how much time their backside is in the chair as that is significantly more correlated to productivity than shopping.

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

#327

Post by planede »

lelanthran wrote: post #324
planede wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO.

> UBI doesn't prevent a fair welfare system on top of it. It doesn't have to be one or the other. UBI replacing unemployment welfare but not other welfare makes the most sense, IMO. Another welfare system in addition to the existing welfare system is quite undesirable for most proponents of UBI who (like the parent I responded to earlier) present "no other welfare system" as a benefit of UBI.

I like the idea of UBI, but I agree with you that it can't replace all welfare. But UBI replacing unemployment welfare is not another welfare system in addition to the existing one. It would simplify the existing welfare system by replacing a complex part (unemployment welfare) with a simpler one (UBI).

I think it worth considering UBI in this light. I'm not a proponent of eliminating all other welfare.

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

#328

Post by guy98238710 »

Shaanie wrote: post #228
guy98238710 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, UBI has its own moral panic. Never thought I would see that, but it seems obvious in retrospect. Both capitalism and communism worship work like some insane religion. If you work, you are a good person. If you don't, you are scum.

People who don't work are usually economic parasites for those who do, so it makes sense to encourage working regardless of which economic system is used.

Once you have certain degree of automation, the hard-working people just drag everyone into pointless rat race.

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

#329

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

bombolo wrote: post #315
NoZebra120vClip wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were they taking issue with your use of a tool, or the fact that you apparently click on phishing links? Was that a test run by your company's cybersecurity department? Is your phone personal? BYOD? Company-issued? I can't fathom how "detecting curl" can put you in the doghouse, but I would shut you down too, for accessing malicious websites.

It's the url, i'm sure it had a get parameter to identify him.

Sure. Companies run phishing trials all the time; it is a favorite pastime of security consultants. They want to see how many of their employees will click on suspicious links. It's extra-difficult to deal with SMS when it comes in from the airwaves, and not a company-controlled system that can be firewalled and IPS'd.

It seems misplaced to blame the company for surveillance when they're trying to keep everyone safe, including the devices in your home. It seems far more preferable to have a sting operation and catch mistakes, than to for-reals access malware and have it install on those same devices. That's exactly what they're trying to prevent and mitigate.

It would be the same whether you're at home on a personal device, or you're at your desk in the office with boss over shoulder. You would have a right to object to oppressive or intrusive company surveillance, but this doesn't even come close.

Of course, we have few details here, and I have leapt to a very particular conclusion about that situation; who knows what really happened. But in the interest of general knowledge, employees should be aware that phishing tests will be run, and you can expect to have a little chat if you fail the test (or actually get phished.)

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

#330

Post by ok123456 »

rpodraza wrote: post #289
ok123456 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Nice. Flipper zero is pretty pricey tho, and in this case a simple dev board with usb (like stm32) will suffice ;)

Of course, you can do it cheaper. The advantage of the flipper is its form factor. It just looks like some kind of toy.
Post reply on HN