safe to say anything happening on a work computer or work software is looked at or can be looked at by someone in the company.
Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
41–50 of 317 posts
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#42Anyone 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.
I'll happily use an old Office, just please splice in the "What do you want to do?" search bar so I don't have to hunt through nested menus/ribbons for some obscure formatting option I use once every 6 months.
LibreOffice is actually pretty great, it's not "run on a Pentium 100 MHz" fast but it's stable and works well for basic office spreadsheet/word processing/powerpoint tasks.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#43It seems maybe not the intent, but the practical result is to use the private sector to implement CCP like social credit scores isn't it? By doing everything in the private sector they get around all those pesky constitutional protections.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
This assumes you know that said party is doing such things, often one doesn't.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#45I 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 be this:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/compliance/co...
So I think if Microsoft existed in the world of 1984, they would easily be the preferred tech vendor for IngSoc.
Side note, do you think this would also detect the money laundering and bribery going on within Microsoft itself?
https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/25/22995144/microsoft-foreig...
Side-side note, I think the reason why that is allowed to still keep going on given that the SEC knows about it and that there's ample evidence has to do with national security reasons.
It's extremely troubling that given all this corporate authoritarian AI tech they built that Microsoft is still trying to be the voice of reason about the dangers of AI.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#46There is no way they will be able to make an AI at this point that will
A) Be accurate
B) Work across multiple contexts
C) Run efficiently on billions of messages
This will just result in many false positives, and unnecessary eavesdropping on employees personal conversations.
Once its revealed an organization is using this, people will quickly move all conversations to another platform, even if policy forbids that. Resulting in an even greater security risk potentially.
And as per usual, if Microsoft gets someone fired (e.g. comes in looking for money laundering, finds out the staff member is making fun of their boss), there will be no repercussions.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool. Mine doesn't. I know that because I am the 365 admin.
> ... I am the 365 admin. For now. Remember MS can literally run these tools on your communications and if/when something gets flagged... raise it out-of-band to a senior business person at your company for follow up. They likely have the contact details for senior business people at your company already. ;)
What makes you think Microsoft would care about this? They provide the tools to make managers happy but they certainly aren't going to start running the tools for you.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those ones are a joke. Look at the purported "Roadmap ID" that poster used.
Thank you for pointing it out. FWIW, the "workspace collusion" one is actually real - original source: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/roadmap?rtc=1&...
It reads pretty differently though? The specific obligations part seems like it applies to something federal.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#49The only way this sort of thing changes is with labor organization ie unionization. The government won’t save you from efforts like this. The government represents the interests of the capital owning class. The demonization of unions is one of the most successful cases of propaganda in the last century. It’s gone so far s people who will die on the hill of Jeff Bezos paying slightly more taxes because everyone seems…
>The demonization of unions is over the most successful cases of propaganda in the last century. It is possible to see unions as both the source of some and solution to other forms of abuse.
Why are you saying this? It's what every single corporate pamphlet and forced talk says. No one is saying unions will bring everyone enlightenment and cure cancer.
What people are saying is workers need a say in how the workplace is run and companies spending millions convincing folk otherwise should be forced to stop.
Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)
#50There are engineers who thought it would be a good idea to develop and train these models.