Because of this, one might feel like the same standard applies to other one-on-one and small group communication avenues, but it’s actually completely the opposite.
Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
251–260 of 317 posts
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#252I'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".
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#253Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
>think they’ll be Jeff Bezos one day. I see that phrase thrown around a lot. It's a variant of "you're never going to be a billionaire (so you shouldn't be against X)." Why do people assume that you have to think you'll be a billionaire to be against something that would affect billionaires negatively? Is something only wrong if you think you'll find yourself in that position one day?
A lot of people will quote John Steinbeck [1]: > “John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” There's plenty of circumstantial evidence to back this up. The 2000 election is a good example although I can't find a good quote for this. Gore famously daemonized the "top 1%". An illuminatin…
"Except for the field organizers of strikes, who were pretty tough monkeys and devoted, most of the so-called Communists I met were middle-class, middle-aged people playing a game of dreams. I remember a woman in easy circumstances saying to another even more affluent: 'After the revolution even we will have more, won't we, dear?' Then there was another lover of proletarians who used to raise hell with Sunday picknickers on her property. I guess the trouble was that we didn't have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by the investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew — at least they claimed to be Communists — couldn't have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves." (source: https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Steinbeck)
Ronald Wright somehow turned this into a quip about Gramscian false consciousness, in the great global game of telephone we're all playing with each others' words.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#255Anyone else miss Office 97? You just installed it locally off a disc and it just worked when you needed it. You didn’t even need internet.
Not really. Office suites were a mistake. Return to text editor.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#256Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#257This 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?
In your specific example, there could be a slightly more positive reason --- proof that you do actually have a job at where you claim to be working.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#258> Microsoft Purview public preview provides policies protecting products, probably punting people’s privacy.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#259This 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…
> 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 job interviews and the CIO had a report, which he used to prematurely cut staff when he needed to save budget. On a related note, if you were a Microsoft employee, how comfortable would you be talking with recruiters on LinkedIn?
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#260This 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…
> 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 job interviews and the CIO had a report, which he used to prematurely cut staff when he needed to save budget. On a related note, if you were a Microsoft employee, how comfortable would you be talking with recruiters on LinkedIn?
Even MS's own recruiters will use LinkedIn to contact current MS employees for internal positions.
Tech is a double sided coin. Things like this have the power to be abused, even easily at times, but that doesn't mean they always will be.