Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

pupuweb.com

21–30 of 317 posts

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#21

So, now we can't use Teams to have the "water-cooler" moments that supervisors claim we need, but really we are having them on Signal or IOS and they just can't measure that. Organizations really, really, really hate transparency.

No post body was provided.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#22
post #11
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol depends what industry your in. Im a one man band msp so I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Most folks don't realise they exist, even fewer use the data produced by the systems. Legit 90% of the time it's just kept in case of gov audit or something going pear shaped and we need proof it wasn't us. Trust is all well and good, but trust ain't gonna pass an audit or get you out of trouble i…

Small software companies doing innovative things. Any business area that might need an external audit is a severe red flag in this context. That also typically means it's less fun, IMO. A software company running a Microsoft-based email/etc system is also a red flag in this context. I mean, why...

All businesses require an audit of some kind. How do you think due diligence works?

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#23

If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool. I'd go as far to say that if you think there is any form of electronic communication that isn't being monitored on some level you're also being foolish.

There's a difference between monitoring and logging, and nobody is reading the chat logs or even paying attention to chat metrics in many workplaces because the value of doing so is dubious given the potential for employee backlash.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#24
I'm already not wanting to have personal conversations on teams. My tech savvy colleagues and the ones who can be convinced are on signal, where we talk about job offers and relationships. A few others do Instagram, and get to see my art photography. And occasionally I'll bump into someone when we're both in the office and be able to say whatever not looked over by AI. There's a real chilling effect on getting to know people.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#25
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol depends what industry your in. Im a one man band msp so I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Most folks don't realise they exist, even fewer use the data produced by the systems. Legit 90% of the time it's just kept in case of gov audit or something going pear shaped and we need proof it wasn't us. Trust is all well and good, but trust ain't gonna pass an audit or get you out of trouble i…

> I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Does that bother you at all? Not just about the employees you’re doing this to, but about being part of the system that normalises this kind of surveillance generally? Is this really the kind of world you want to live in?

The great thing about capitalism and the free market is that you can choose not to enter into an agreement with a party if they run contrary to your ethics and morals.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#26
post #14
post #6

Next step will be to detect potential attempt at unionizing.

They have "workplace collusion" as a category, and even more dystopian shit, like: EDIT: apparently these 2 are just jokes, sorry for not checking my sources! `Negative emotions: Expressions of sadness, unhappiness, discontent, anger, rage, anguish, or existential ennui, as these may negatively affect team cohesion. Joy: Language suggesting hopefulness, optimism, anticipation of a brighter future, faith in humankind…

Those ones are a joke. Look at the purported "Roadmap ID" that poster used.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#28

If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool. I'd go as far to say that if you think there is any form of electronic communication that isn't being monitored on some level you're also being foolish.

It's probably more common that they log it, and trawl it when there's some reason to. Still dystopian, but less work.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#29
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small software companies doing innovative things. Any business area that might need an external audit is a severe red flag in this context. That also typically means it's less fun, IMO. A software company running a Microsoft-based email/etc system is also a red flag in this context. I mean, why...

All businesses require an audit of some kind. How do you think due diligence works?

That's an extremely strong statement that is obviously not true, except in the most weak and generic form.

How do you think reality works?

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#30
post #11
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol depends what industry your in. Im a one man band msp so I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Most folks don't realise they exist, even fewer use the data produced by the systems. Legit 90% of the time it's just kept in case of gov audit or something going pear shaped and we need proof it wasn't us. Trust is all well and good, but trust ain't gonna pass an audit or get you out of trouble i…

Small software companies doing innovative things. Any business area that might need an external audit is a severe red flag in this context. That also typically means it's less fun, IMO. A software company running a Microsoft-based email/etc system is also a red flag in this context. I mean, why...

What email services would not be a red flag?
Post reply on HN