5 ms·

" Productivity Score is designed to help IT administrators measure and manage adoption so their people can get the most out of Microsoft 365. We appreciate the

" Productivity Score is designed to help IT administrators measure and manage adoption so their people can get the most out of Microsoft 365. We appreciate the feedback we’ve heard over the last few days and are moving quickly to respond by removing user names entirely from the product. This change will ensure that Productivity Score can’t be used to monitor individual employees. " Seems like exactly what everyone wanted. Great response.

tpoacher 6y ago
... in the freemium edition, that is. The premium edition, however ... (joking)
StanislavPetrov 6y ago
>Great response. It might be a great response and an outcome that everyone wanted, but in no way can the Microsoft statement be accurately construed as an apology.
partiallypro 6y ago
I guess a problem is that some smaller offices use O365 and simple deduction could link the person back to the data O365 spits out. They should make the feature unavailable unless you have a certain amount of seats.
- skohan 6y ago
  Yeah this is a major question. For instance, under GDPR rules, most restrictions relate to "personally identifiable information", which is defined as not only data which specifically identifies an individual, but any data which can be used to identify an individual. So for instance if you collect detailed information about usage patterns which includes country of origin, and you have exactly one user in Sudan, data privacy rules would apply because you would know exactly which user the data is referring to. I actually wonder how this product would have passed GDPR at all.
  - jodrellblank 6y ago
    The GDPR doesn’t say you can’t know anything about anyone; “all” it says is that you tell people what data you collect and why, and delete it when you don’t need it. As long as you’ve told your user in Sudan that country of origin is something you collect for marketing decisions, it’s fine.
    - skohan 6y ago
      That's not entirely correct. So for example, let's say I ask users about users' name and address, and I ask their permission to store this under GDPR. In a separate table, I store "anonymous" sensitive data, like which how many users in each country have a particular health issue, but it's "anonymous" so I never asked the user's permission to collect it. I am violating GDPR, because I can use my demographic data to identify some specific users who have some specific health conditions, and I never asked permission to do that.
skohan 6y ago
I think it's quite a stretch to consider this a "great" response. MS got caught treating user privacy in a particularly abysmal way, but it's 100% in line with their general approach to user data. The main difference here is the revelation that they're sharing your personal data with your employer rather than keeping it to themselves. Sure they rolled back their intrusive practice when they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, but this gives me zero confidence that they are treating my privacy with respect in any other case.

tpoacher 6y ago

... in the freemium edition, that is. The premium edition, however ... (joking)

StanislavPetrov 6y ago

>Great response. It might be a great response and an outcome that everyone wanted, but in no way can the Microsoft statement be accurately construed as an apology.

partiallypro 6y ago

I guess a problem is that some smaller offices use O365 and simple deduction could link the person back to the data O365 spits out. They should make the feature unavailable unless you have a certain amount of seats.

skohan 6y ago
Yeah this is a major question. For instance, under GDPR rules, most restrictions relate to "personally identifiable information", which is defined as not only data which specifically identifies an individual, but any data which can be used to identify an individual. So for instance if you collect detailed information about usage patterns which includes country of origin, and you have exactly one user in Sudan, data privacy rules would apply because you would know exactly which user the data is referring to. I actually wonder how this product would have passed GDPR at all.
- jodrellblank 6y ago
  The GDPR doesn’t say you can’t know anything about anyone; “all” it says is that you tell people what data you collect and why, and delete it when you don’t need it. As long as you’ve told your user in Sudan that country of origin is something you collect for marketing decisions, it’s fine.
  - skohan 6y ago
    That's not entirely correct. So for example, let's say I ask users about users' name and address, and I ask their permission to store this under GDPR. In a separate table, I store "anonymous" sensitive data, like which how many users in each country have a particular health issue, but it's "anonymous" so I never asked the user's permission to collect it. I am violating GDPR, because I can use my demographic data to identify some specific users who have some specific health conditions, and I never asked permission to do that.

skohan 6y ago

I think it's quite a stretch to consider this a "great" response. MS got caught treating user privacy in a particularly abysmal way, but it's 100% in line with their general approach to user data. The main difference here is the revelation that they're sharing your personal data with your employer rather than keeping it to themselves. Sure they rolled back their intrusive practice when they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, but this gives me zero confidence that they are treating my privacy with respect in any other case.