241–250 of 317 posts
I think if you have an E5 license there is already thoughtcrime functionality built-in. I remember someone demoing this to me in a Teams user group, and no one seemed to think it was creepy at all. In addition to flagging keywords it also used AI to detect undesirable thoughts and emotions, under the guise of anti-harassment and compliance. Unfortunately I can't remember the name of the feature but I think it might b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their code, their decisions is why it's bad. If the decide to start tattling to Microsoft too, what are you going to do? If it's open, we can fork it and move on with your lives. Free and open gives you and me the power to control our own communication.
> If the decide to start tattling to Microsoft too, what are you going to do? That would be obvious in their source code, wouldn't it? I would stop using them then.
I've always had a preference against working with microsoft products but this is getting to the point where I'd find a new gig instead of being subjected to this stuff.
I think at least some my staff will likely resign because mandatory deep inspection / network monitoring is being forced onto everyone's computers by the IT department. It's probably the only way to stop it from happening at the moment. Unfortunately the buzzword of "zero trust" has been bent towards meaning "spy on everything your employees do".
This is nothing new: corporations have scanned instant messages, emails and even recorded phone calls for decades, and will fire you based on that evidence for violations of corporate policy. And will sue you or call the cops if they detect potential crimes. I’m kind of surprised so many people are shocked by this. I know of one company where dozens of people were fired because their email was scanned for external jo…
Why do people persist in using work emails for personal things like job interviews?
Some people are weird like that. There’s also old people who only have work emails. Lots of different people in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if it works out as you say, the chilling effect on who's left will be very real.
That already exists in general - this is why CEOs get surrounded by yesmen. We already filter out people who aren’t smart enough to keep their mouth shut when necessary.
Scaling the problem is likely to increase the damage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They also built tools to detect when you're doing that
Unless they're recording my conversation at the pub I do not see how (very illegal where I live, I'm hoping illegal everywhere). Care to link an example?
Submitted title was "Office 365 implementing AI to detect employees colluding, leaving and more". That broke the site guidelines: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html The proper place to include that sort of interpretation is by adding it in a comment in the thread. Then your interpretation is on a level playing…
OK, I will so in future. I tried to summarize the article in the title. Will follow the guidelines from now on.
Submitted title was "Office 365 implementing AI to detect employees colluding, leaving and more". That broke the site guidelines: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html The proper place to include that sort of interpretation is by adding it in a comment in the thread. Then your interpretation is on a level playing…
I know it's policy to use original titles, but the editorialization in this case hardly seems sensational. Just look at the linked roadmap tickets: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https:…
I'm not saying the current title is the perfect outcome—I'm just not sure what the perfect outcome is. I do think that in this case, the dystopian title adds to the quality of the post (but only once it's on the front page).
It's impossible to cover the general case with a simple rule. Even a paragraph of rules wouldn't be enough—people would discover corner case after corner case and you'd eventually need a book. I think HN's guideline covers the domain as well as any single sentence could; and then we can cover all the exceptions ad hoc, and talk about them in the comments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know it's policy to use original titles, but the editorialization in this case hardly seems sensational. Just look at the linked roadmap tickets: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https://www.microsoft.com/en-my/microsoft-365/roadmap?filter... * https:…
> I know it's policy to use original titles, but the editorialization in this case hardly seems sensational. It's interesting that the HackerNews guideline makes no statement about whether a custom headline is sensational or reasonable. It is: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." They probably have a slightly different reason for this rule than many people first im…
Remember the gfood old days of Usenet with signatures that deliberately contained keywards to try and DDoS the NSA's "line eater"