Live data from Hacker News

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

privacyinternational.org

361–367 of 367 posts

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

#361

Full disclosure. I just built this for Google Workspace (www.gofasterhq.com). I built it because it's a tool I wish I had when managing teams in the past. These articles are very one sided and there is a productive middle ground to be established using productivity management tools. As a manager, it can be difficult to know what your team is working on and who is actually productive, especially in a remote environmen…

I'm in management, have been for about 5 years. I've never found it difficult to judge the productivity of my team members. Even in the 15 years I was primarily an IC it was obvious, to me, who the most productive people on the team were and who were the least. If you are actually involved in the work the team is doing, and if you take even a little bit of time to have an actual relationship with people, it is not hard. What to do about it (besides the lazy "fire them") can be very hard. Helping people grow can be very hard, depending on the people. But my team doesn't work "for me," they work with me. I'm as much responsible to them as I am for them.

As another comment points out, the people that use these tools would never give their reports the same data about their own "productivity." Employers try not to even let employees know about this kind of surveillance because it directly undermines any supposed "team culture." They have no place in an equitable relationship. When management uses these kinds of tools they make it clear that they don't care about those being managed. They don't care enough to be honest with them, to be accountable themselves for how they manage. The obvious message these tools send to those under this kind of management is that that management does not see them as respected colleagues and team members, but rather cogs in the machine, "resources" to be exploited.

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

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes the famous phishing tests. They bypass every spam filter, and if your company is like mine, that uses a new external website every week for something, it's completely impossible to tell apart phishing from actual email.

I've successfully navigated dozens. Git gud?

OP hit the URL…

Maybe your company isn't as bad as mine? If the test bypasses the spam filters and is correctly signed from an internal sender… what kind of idiot test is it?

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

#363
post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are, slowly but surely, approaching a point where worl is no longer a feasible way to distrubute wealth of a society to everyone. Reasons are automation, efficiency improvements, limited growth and, yes as much as I hate it, AI. Once we reach that point, as a society we have to answer the question of what happens to those people who find themselvesbout ofbwork. And those left with dull and dangerous jobs, usually…

I'd word it slightly differently. I agree there may shrinking pool of economically viable jobs and it's likely to shrink considerably in coming decades. However, there's lots and lots of stuff that needs to be done for society to function properly. E.g. all sorts of community work. From organising local community events to self-support groups to picking up trash in a local park. A lot of stuff works (or doesn't, look…

> if we as society

I think right here is where the issue is going to come in. Currently society at large won't be getting that money, it's mostly accreting in the pockets of an small set of increasingly ultra wealthy people

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

#364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

Trying to keep everybody safe using misguided strategies that do not work, instead of doing something that works (like using 1 internal domain and nothing else, for example).

I'm not sure what you view as misguided, but it's a somewhat effective and accessible tool in the box for CISO to gauge and graph employee behavior when confronted with suspicious communication. Also I have no idea how "1 internal domain" has anything to do with phishing on some dude's phone.

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

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TikTok's user profiling algorithm pays close attention to time spent on microcontent. Twitter may be going down a similar path.

I occasionally complain about Facebook adverts. That means I pay them more attention. That means Facebook show me the same/similar adverts more ... FB still get paid for those impressions, but each one reinforces my desire never to let that company have a cent of my money.

Your attention, engagement, and data is far more valuable to Facebook than your money.

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

#366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TikTok's user profiling algorithm pays close attention to time spent on microcontent. Twitter may be going down a similar path.

I occasionally complain about Facebook adverts. That means I pay them more attention. That means Facebook show me the same/similar adverts more ... FB still get paid for those impressions, but each one reinforces my desire never to let that company have a cent of my money.

You almost can't watch a YouTube video to critique it without implicitly endorsing and spreading it through the algorithm.

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

#367
post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They ain't desirable. But who wants to pay them do nothing? I do. Because these sentences are in opposition, not support. If they are undesirable in the workforce (reduce productivity or whatever) then why would you want them working? If they drain x dollars from the system, UBI costs y dollars, and if y Here's how I see it: if the measure of a man is how he treats someone who can give him nothing, then the measure…

Humans are not rational economic units. There's much more at play. My issue with UBI (and too lax welfare in general) is cultural issues. Once you get multiple generations of people who never worked.. It's not good. Personally I think USSR was somewhat close to UBI. Working was mandatory and pay was crap. But everybody looked the other way when somebody slacked or was drunk at work all the time. It was next to imposs…

And as a society, all those lazy commies accidentally created a world super power with all their slacking. How bizarre...
Post reply on HN