3 ms·

Kind of surprised almost no comment (no comment I've seen, at the time of writing of course) takes into account the circumstances stated in the very first sente

Kind of surprised almost no comment (no comment I've seen, at the time of writing of course) takes into account the circumstances stated in the very first sentence of the article. The job was partly about _disinfecting surfaces_ in _schools_ in the midst of a _pandemic_ ; I'm not saying that makes it excusable, or that this case shouldn't have been dealt with better, but in the context of governmental contract tracing apps, lockdowns, constant and various limitations put on freedom of civilians in order to fight the pandemic, I think we can see how even a good willed employer might (wrongly) feel entitled to demand such a thing. Privacy in the midst of emergencies (we can debate the exact scope of the emergency at hand of course) can be a slippery thing.

a1369209993 6y ago
That makes it worse; location tracking replaces more effective means of measuring job performance (like actually inspecting things in person), and hence reduces the confidence that surfaces are being properly disinfected. (Albeit probably not by much, since anyone who thinks location tracking is a good idea probably wasn't doing proper inspections anyway.) > Privacy in the midst of emergencies [...] can be a slippery thing. No. In privacy, as in computational complexity, the worse case is the single most important non-aggregate measure, and the second most important measure period, after average case.