5 ms·

"JUST QUIT" makes it sound like quitting is an easy thing to do. "like they have a gun to their head" makes it sound like direct physical threat is the only mec

"JUST QUIT" makes it sound like quitting is an easy thing to do. "like they have a gun to their head" makes it sound like direct physical threat is the only mechanism of coercion that exists. These things are just not true. For a lot of people, who have more expenses than savings and are not in highly demanded jobs, quitting puts them at great risk. They have a metaphorical gun to their heads. They might not die the moment they quit, but by quitting they are endangering themselves and those that depend on them. Their relationship with employment is inherently coercive. This is especially true during a pandemic that's causing more people to be unemployed.

_curious_ 6y ago
"For a lot of people, who have more expenses than savings and are not in highly demanded jobs, quitting puts them at great risk. They have a metaphorical gun to their heads. They might not die the moment they quit, but by quitting they are endangering themselves and those that depend on them. Their relationship with employment is inherently coercive." With all of that said: whose responsibility is it to avoid this type of situation? Is it anyone (or anything) but the individual them-self? And should one unfortunately find themselves in this situation described above, whose responsibility is it to figure out a solution? Is it their friends and family who is responsible? Their neighbors? The government? Are you responsible?
- curryst 6y ago
  I would argue it is the government's job to not allow businesses to impose dehumanizing conditions on workers due to the extreme imbalance of power. It's probably not a risk for most of the HN users. Most of us are in high demand jobs, and we would simply refuse to work for a company that uses this kind of spyware. A lot of people don't have that option, because there isn't as much demand for their jobs. Should we really be given that extra privilege simply because what we chose or wanted or had the ability to do is in higher demand? I would say no, it should be a fundamental right of workers in general. It's not as if there is some drastic harm that not installing spyware would impose. If your best means of measuring worker productivity is this junk, you're not going to last as a business anyways.
  - _curious_ 6y ago
    "Should we really be given that extra privilege simply because what we chose or wanted or had the ability to do is in higher demand?" So you think you are privileged because you exercised your option to decide and do what's best for you? Or because you have the demonstrable ability to make it happen - ie - learn a thing that is in demand? Is it a privilege of the ability to act in your own self-interest? Stepping back, maybe it's because you have acquired cognitive skills that others have not that you are privileged? The mere ability to think for yourself, that's a privilege too, then? What about changing your mind, increasing your understanding of, evolving a thought...all privileges, yeah? Perhaps somewhere along the line you have made a decision that was hard and required risk and sacrifice but that contributed to who you are and where you are today, was that pain and suffering part of the privilege? What about losing someone or something you love, because surely it's a privilege to experience love in the first place, no? Is anything that makes us different and unique from one-another not a privilege by extension? Has the word privilege been used and abused to the degree that it means absolutely nothing anymore? What about being alive...is that like, the ultimate privilege? So when all are privileged, are any, really?
    - Fargren 6y ago
      > When all are privileged, are any, really? That's like saying "when everybody has money, does anyone have money?". People have varying amounts (and kinds) of privilege, but some have more than others.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - _curious_ 6y ago
        ...and who has the privilege of judging others privilege?
        evilolive 6y ago
        And you really think this is an honest argumentation?
- maaanu 6y ago
  Yes, the government is responsible because it violates basic human rights. At least in germany this kind of behavior is forbidden.
- chipotle_coyote 6y ago
  Why are you so insistent that it's absolutely, under no circumstances, the responsibility of the employer?
  - _curious_ 6y ago
    What do you mean by "it's" in this question - what is "it" you refer to?

_curious_ 6y ago

"For a lot of people, who have more expenses than savings and are not in highly demanded jobs, quitting puts them at great risk. They have a metaphorical gun to their heads. They might not die the moment they quit, but by quitting they are endangering themselves and those that depend on them. Their relationship with employment is inherently coercive." With all of that said: whose responsibility is it to avoid this type of situation? Is it anyone (or anything) but the individual them-self? And should one unfortunately find themselves in this situation described above, whose responsibility is it to figure out a solution? Is it their friends and family who is responsible? Their neighbors? The government? Are you responsible?

curryst 6y ago
I would argue it is the government's job to not allow businesses to impose dehumanizing conditions on workers due to the extreme imbalance of power. It's probably not a risk for most of the HN users. Most of us are in high demand jobs, and we would simply refuse to work for a company that uses this kind of spyware. A lot of people don't have that option, because there isn't as much demand for their jobs. Should we really be given that extra privilege simply because what we chose or wanted or had the ability to do is in higher demand? I would say no, it should be a fundamental right of workers in general. It's not as if there is some drastic harm that not installing spyware would impose. If your best means of measuring worker productivity is this junk, you're not going to last as a business anyways.
- _curious_ 6y ago
  "Should we really be given that extra privilege simply because what we chose or wanted or had the ability to do is in higher demand?" So you think you are privileged because you exercised your option to decide and do what's best for you? Or because you have the demonstrable ability to make it happen - ie - learn a thing that is in demand? Is it a privilege of the ability to act in your own self-interest? Stepping back, maybe it's because you have acquired cognitive skills that others have not that you are privileged? The mere ability to think for yourself, that's a privilege too, then? What about changing your mind, increasing your understanding of, evolving a thought...all privileges, yeah? Perhaps somewhere along the line you have made a decision that was hard and required risk and sacrifice but that contributed to who you are and where you are today, was that pain and suffering part of the privilege? What about losing someone or something you love, because surely it's a privilege to experience love in the first place, no? Is anything that makes us different and unique from one-another not a privilege by extension? Has the word privilege been used and abused to the degree that it means absolutely nothing anymore? What about being alive...is that like, the ultimate privilege? So when all are privileged, are any, really?
  - Fargren 6y ago
    > When all are privileged, are any, really? That's like saying "when everybody has money, does anyone have money?". People have varying amounts (and kinds) of privilege, but some have more than others.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - _curious_ 6y ago
      ...and who has the privilege of judging others privilege?
      - evilolive 6y ago
        And you really think this is an honest argumentation?
maaanu 6y ago
Yes, the government is responsible because it violates basic human rights. At least in germany this kind of behavior is forbidden.
chipotle_coyote 6y ago
Why are you so insistent that it's absolutely, under no circumstances, the responsibility of the employer?
- _curious_ 6y ago
  What do you mean by "it's" in this question - what is "it" you refer to?