5 ms·

Could you name the company? We need strong anti-monitoring laws. The only profession I think needs constant monotoring is the average cop, and not so average

Could you name the company? We need strong anti-monitoring laws. The only profession I think needs constant monotoring is the average cop, and not so average cop, like the FBI. It's ironic many cops are required to wear cams now, but they can still cover that lens.

golergka 4y ago
You already have them: freedom not to sign a contract with such an employer. Something that you don't have in a communist country.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  > You already have them: freedom not to sign a contract with such an employer. When that employer is the only major one around, there is no such thing as a truly free choice. There's a reason why meatpackers, Amazon or Walmart like to set up shop preferably in areas with high unemployment and why unionization attempts have been so fraught with failures - these companies exploit that the US social safety net is pretty much broken, and when your survival depends on that crap job you're not gonna complain too much. A truly free labor market is one where everyone can choose to not work without losing their home as a result... only then, employers are forced to provide actually competitive working conditions (wages, workplace safety, equipment, break times).
  - golergka 4y ago
    You always have a choice to not engage in any commercial activity with other people and rely on your own devices.
    - mschuster91 4y ago
      You reasonably can't. Most people don't live in rural areas with enough farm land, and even if you have farm land that can grow enough (both in quantity and variety) crops to feed your family, which is a rarity in itself, you still need to deal with property taxes, expenses for maintaining your farm house and equipment, school expenses... Face it, there is no way of living "off the grid" to a reasonable degree.
- npteljes 4y ago
  Freedom must be protected by good legislation, otherwise you end up with situations like wage slavery[0] or a food desert[1]. More freedom for companies could easily mean less freedom for the people. Although I concede the point that basically any country is in a better shape than NK in this regard. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert
  - golergka 4y ago
    That's the opposite of protecting the freedom, as with such legislation you're limiting people's freedom to enter contracts of their own choosing.
    - npteljes 4y ago
      Yeah that's true. Ideally I'd limit them to the least exploitative contracts possible. My thinking here is inspired by the free software movement, where the basic idea is that by having a specifically limiting license, they enable the greatest freedom for users. With the implied idea being that by having fewer restrictions, the system ends up being more restrictive, instead of less restrictive.
- gambiting 4y ago
  That's like saying we don't need laws against physical punishment at workplace, after all, you simply have the freedom to not sign a contract with an employer who beats their workers with a stick, right? In fact why have any regulation around employment, you are free to pick where you work, do you not?
  - golergka 4y ago
    Why would you need laws against physical punishment at a workplace if you already have general-purpose laws against assault?
scaramanga 4y ago
Sadly, I can't remember, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to google them up. They had a hilarious part of the employment process which was figuring out if the new hire was in the EU or not, because if so, then legally the software could not be operated without consent. But that obviously lead to awkward conversations where consent given in that situation would be pretty questionable...
- Jon_Lowtek 4y ago
  That means they believe the surveillance is not necessary for the position they hire, otherwise it would not be awkward.
kefir 4y ago
https://www.crossover.com/ https://www.crossover.com/ Pays $100K for senior developer role which is big money in many parts of the world (India, Eastern Europe, Africa, etc), so people put up with spyware.

golergka 4y ago

You already have them: freedom not to sign a contract with such an employer. Something that you don't have in a communist country.

mschuster91 4y ago
> You already have them: freedom not to sign a contract with such an employer. When that employer is the only major one around, there is no such thing as a truly free choice. There's a reason why meatpackers, Amazon or Walmart like to set up shop preferably in areas with high unemployment and why unionization attempts have been so fraught with failures - these companies exploit that the US social safety net is pretty much broken, and when your survival depends on that crap job you're not gonna complain too much. A truly free labor market is one where everyone can choose to not work without losing their home as a result... only then, employers are forced to provide actually competitive working conditions (wages, workplace safety, equipment, break times).
- golergka 4y ago
  You always have a choice to not engage in any commercial activity with other people and rely on your own devices.
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    You reasonably can't. Most people don't live in rural areas with enough farm land, and even if you have farm land that can grow enough (both in quantity and variety) crops to feed your family, which is a rarity in itself, you still need to deal with property taxes, expenses for maintaining your farm house and equipment, school expenses... Face it, there is no way of living "off the grid" to a reasonable degree.
npteljes 4y ago
Freedom must be protected by good legislation, otherwise you end up with situations like wage slavery[0] or a food desert[1]. More freedom for companies could easily mean less freedom for the people. Although I concede the point that basically any country is in a better shape than NK in this regard. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert
- golergka 4y ago
  That's the opposite of protecting the freedom, as with such legislation you're limiting people's freedom to enter contracts of their own choosing.
  - npteljes 4y ago
    Yeah that's true. Ideally I'd limit them to the least exploitative contracts possible. My thinking here is inspired by the free software movement, where the basic idea is that by having a specifically limiting license, they enable the greatest freedom for users. With the implied idea being that by having fewer restrictions, the system ends up being more restrictive, instead of less restrictive.
gambiting 4y ago
That's like saying we don't need laws against physical punishment at workplace, after all, you simply have the freedom to not sign a contract with an employer who beats their workers with a stick, right? In fact why have any regulation around employment, you are free to pick where you work, do you not?
- golergka 4y ago
  Why would you need laws against physical punishment at a workplace if you already have general-purpose laws against assault?

scaramanga 4y ago

Sadly, I can't remember, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to google them up. They had a hilarious part of the employment process which was figuring out if the new hire was in the EU or not, because if so, then legally the software could not be operated without consent. But that obviously lead to awkward conversations where consent given in that situation would be pretty questionable...

Jon_Lowtek 4y ago
That means they believe the surveillance is not necessary for the position they hire, otherwise it would not be awkward.

kefir 4y ago

https://www.crossover.com/ https://www.crossover.com/ Pays $100K for senior developer role which is big money in many parts of the world (India, Eastern Europe, Africa, etc), so people put up with spyware.