8 ms·

I was surprised (perhaps I shouldn't have been) to encounter bossware-like surveilance in an interview process. About 6 months ago I was interviewing with Inte

I was surprised (perhaps I shouldn't have been) to encounter bossware-like surveilance in an interview process. About 6 months ago I was interviewing with InterSystems, a company that does healthcare software. Only when I signed in for the online coding interview did I learn that they required I have a webcam on myself the whole time. I don't like using coarse language. But it was the first time I struggled to not use the phrase "fuck you" in my email to the recruiter.

Terr_ 2y ago
IMO there's a huge difference between "we do this because we had too many fraudulent applicants and this is a compromise compared to having you interview in-person" versus "this is representative of how the entire employment relationship will go." If the former, their fears are not unfounded: Sometimes the person who impressed you in the interview is not actually the same person who arrives for their first day of work. There are also less-audacious forms of interview cheating, where an off-screen cyber-Cyrano is supplying them with answers and/or keyboard-input. That said, I agree that any workplace with a "webcam on at all times for monitoring" policy for employees is one I would leave ASAP. Not just because it's hostile and offensive, but also because it's indicative of the company doing badly while management is busy "rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic."
- paxys 2y ago
  So you are okay with giving random companies an hour of footage of your face and part of your house just for the privilege of going through their automated screening round?
  - VBprogrammer 2y ago
    Emm, yes? What do you think they are going to do with it. They are also considering giving you access to potentially a vast amount of their IP and maybe even customer data.
    - Teever 2y ago
      Whatever they're legally allowed to and I may never know. That's the problem.
      - kevindamm 2y ago
        Wouldn't you need to sign over your name, image and likeness (along with an affidavit that it isn't already exclusively owned) in order for them to legally reuse it? Granted, I've seen tech employee contracts that do include that wording, but it hasn't been in any of the pre-employment paperwork like NDA, etc., in my experience.
        genocidicbunny 2y ago
        > Wouldn't you need to sign over your name, image and likeness (along with an affidavit that it isn't already exclusively owned) in order for them to legally reuse it Legally? Probably yes. Practically? Fuck no.
    - coldtea 2y ago
      >Emm, yes? What do you think they are going to do with it I don't care what they're going to do with it. They aint having it.
      - VBprogrammer 2y ago
        I just don't understand this at all. Perhaps if they said they intended to record the interview I'd be a little uncomfortable. Otherwise, did you hide your identity in face to face interviews? Do you refuse to enter buildings with CCTV? I've interviewed hundreds of people since COVID / interviews going online. I'm not aware that it's been a problem for a single candidate, I don't even think we say it explicitly.
    - pyrale 2y ago
      Why would they need to give me this for a screening round? Do they expect me to do actual work for them?
- ozim 2y ago
  I agree. But there still is a line like if I am doing take home assignment I will not install spyware on my personal computer. We can have a zoom/teams call with a person where I share screen if someone wants that with enabled camera as well during coding or for discussion.
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    > I will not install spyware on my personal computer. Agreed, if they want to lend me a computer for the exercise, that's another matter. :p It's been a while since I last interviewed in earnest, but my recollection is that those situations (fortunately) correspond with companies that I probably wouldn't want to work for anyway.
  - beefnugs 2y ago
    If you expect to be doing take home assignments, you need to know how to use virtual machines, restrictive outgoing white list only firewalls (or at least open snitch) and wipe everything except the source code you create. Between companies / every single use
    - pseudalopex 2y ago
      Anti cheating software can detect virtual machines.
      - hirvi74 2y ago
        If a prospective employer refused to conduct my interview because their anti-cheating software could detect I was using a virtual machine, then I would tell them to go fuck themselves. I would rather clean toilets with dignity than be bitch-whipped into programming for such psychopathic entities.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  I think the former might strongly imply the latter. If a company can't think of a single way to ensure the person who interviews is actually the person who comes to work the first day (hint, there was a time when webcams did not exist), then that company is probably also inclined to inflict lazy, intrusive surveillance-based schemes on employees after they're hired.
  - aljgz 2y ago
    Genuinely interested to know what are some ways you suggest. The times webcams did not exist, coding interviews were done in-person.
    - ryandrake 2y ago
      That's what I was getting at. If you want to be sure that the human body who will be present in the office is the one doing the work, then you need to have at least one on-site interview. If the work is fully remote, then does it really even matter? If you hire Person A to provide certain business results, but he actually contracts it out to Person B who does all the work, yet the expected business results are provided, then do you actually care?
      - ang_cire 2y ago
        The stand-in is just for the interview, not their actual daily work.
      - aljgz 2y ago
        1- You don't want an incompetent, non-trustworthy person to work for you. They ruin the culture and affect the entire company. 2- Once they are in, it's not likely that they care as much as the interview time to delegate the job to a person. 3- You might have other non-technical requirements, like a background check, culture fit, personal skills, etc. The person they might delegate the job has not gone through this filter.
      - dnissley 2y ago
        There was a story a couple months ago about HBO accidentally hiring people from North Korea
- neilv 2y ago
  > "this is representative of how the entire employment relationship will go." Seems like it's great signal of how the company thinks, and will behave. Not necessarily that they'll put all employees under video surveillance, but if they think that interview thing is a good idea, I'd guess probably they'll do numerous other things along the same line of thinking. Occam's Razor possibilities: 1. The company is normally very enlightened and thoughtful and fair, and has a very subtle and nuanced rationale for why they're coming across as invasive and overbearing in this one narrow instance, and their reasons in this bad first-impressions instance (when they should be thinking about first impressions) were simply somehow not explained. 2. The company is going to behave like a jerk.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
tetromino_ 2y ago
In light of interview fraud, it seems reasonable for the interviewer to request that you are live on camera so they can see that you are who you say you are and that you are working alone. The part that would have made me walk away would have been if the video was being recorded and retained, as opposed to merely being watched live.
- Maskawanian 2y ago
  How would you be able to ensure you that? Even if say, Zoom itself wasn't recording, you can run OBS in the background. Trust runs both ways.
skwirl 2y ago
That doesn’t sound bossware-like at all. It seems completely reasonable to me.
bee_rider 2y ago
Do these companies support Linux or do these recruiters only go after Windows users? There are of course lots of perfectly fine technical folks who are windows-centric, but it still seems like a pretty bad filter to apply to their candidate pool.
silisili 2y ago
Wait just during the interview? That actually sounds completely reasonable.
- vundercind 2y ago
  It probably also means signing over rights for the recording to be used for training AI by some third party, plus god knows what else.
  - VBprogrammer 2y ago
    Oh christ. What absolute nonsense.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
root_axis 2y ago
How can you vet a candidate remotely without having them on the cam? Especially today with all the LLMs, it's pretty much a hiring requirement if you can't bring the candidate in for an interview.
- fullspectrumdev 2y ago
  Easy, you ask them to talk you through their reasoning. LLM’s are fucking terrible at this for anything nontrivial.
  - mistrial9 2y ago
    while you say that, millions of dollars a month are being passed around to do exactly that.. right now in the USA
  - root_axis 2y ago
    > LLM’s are fucking terrible at this for anything nontrivial. They seem pretty solid in my experience, in fact, if they shine at anything it's expository blobs of text.
  - Kiro 2y ago
    Not my experience at all. I would say humans are much worse at this.
  - BeetleB 2y ago
    > Easy, you ask them to talk you through their reasoning. > LLM’s are fucking terrible at this for anything nontrivial. Amusingly, one of the common pieces of advice to limit hallucinations is to ask the LLM to walk through the reasoning.
- hnthrow289570 2y ago
  We're probably at the point where it's cost effective to pay for traveling-to-interview again, especially for the later-round interviews. That is, unless companies are lying about how much damage bad hiring does. I don't suspect they are, but they apparently can't also do the math to go back to that option.
apimade 2y ago
Cybersecurity nerd here, have talked to many platform and financial company CISO’s, security teams and recruiters over the past few years. Fake interviewees are pretty rampant. We’re getting to the point where presenting yourself in-person to a government representative, agency or a private attestation company will be part of the onboarding process. At this point it looks like it’ll be iris scans. In the US it’s even an issue in-person with H1B’s where they get interviewed and hired online, then someone else shows up. Also the fact that insider threats are almost never budgeted for, and so many companies blanket-approve access to systems like logging systems, customer support systems, source code, etc - means attackers don’t even need to get hired into a very important role to get the data they want.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  > then someone else shows up someone else shows up ? what is the denominator
  - kbrkbr 2y ago
    We've seen that also. You interview someone online, help file the paperwork to get into the country and work visum, and then someone else, a technically much weaker guy, shows up on the first day. We had that twice in the last two years
    - dalyons 2y ago
      wild. So the paperwork and the visa etc was all actually filled out with the details of the weaker guy? Including the photo and suchlike? crazy that gets past the companies immigration lawyers Also, doesnt he just get fired straight away and lose his visa? Seems like very high effort and low chance of success, I must be missing something
      - kbrkbr 2y ago
        This is in EU. You have three months to find a new job, which I found here after your comment made me think [1]. This may be a reasonable gamble, as many companies do probably not expect such a rochade, and do not have detective measures in place. And if that doesn't work, you still have 3 months time to find another job in an environment that favored job seekers at this time. [1] https://expatrist.com/losing-a-job-in-germany-with-eu-blue-card/ https://expatrist.com/losing-a-job-in-germany-with-eu-blue-c...
klntsky 2y ago
Unfortunately this is a requirement nowadays. Scammers learned how to generate realistic CVs and they organize people to pass online interviews for them. After getting the job, they do nothing, get their salary for the first billing period, and leave.
- brokenmachine 2y ago
  So there's people who are capable enough to actually get jobs like that working for them? They'd need to get more than one job per pay period for that to be more lucrative than just doing one of the jobs they were approved for. Also the money would be split between the scammers. That sounds like more work than actually doing a normal job, but I guess it may be more automatable. I don't know though, interview processes can be very tedious.
  - klntsky 2y ago
    > That sounds like more work than actually doing a normal job If one is eligible to do the job in the first place
  - kristopolous 2y ago
    Tech interviews? Most are formulaic bullshit. You can coach someone to pass them in a few weeks, that's what the bootcamp phenomena is about.
    - ang_cire 2y ago
      For bad coding interviews, sure. Use a short take-home test for coding stuff, and then do a live interview where you do roleplay and situational questions that make it really easy to tell if someone has actually done this stuff as a job, or is just reciting answers they memorized.
- hirvi74 2y ago
  > Scammers learned how to generate realistic CVs and they organize people to pass online interviews for them. Can they help me out? Apparently, those scammers have figured out a way to convince companies they are real applicants, yet somehow I, a real applicant, apparently cannot do the same.
surfingdino 2y ago
I was asked to be recorded answering three stupid questions like "what motivates you?", "why do you want to work here?" etc. before attending a multi-stage interview. I never got invited to that interview, and I did wonder if I could take them to court, because my CV showed me as good fit for the job (literally ticked all the boxes), but they clearly rejected me based on the video. (In case you wonder why I thought I was a good fit, I can tell you that I built the tech they were implementing.
- hobotime 2y ago
  Perhaps during the video they discovered that they didn't like you.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - surfingdino 2y ago
    You're not supposed to see candidates' faces on applications to make sure there is no bias based on looks. Not sure how enforceable that is.
    - ramon156 2y ago
      No law says its illegal, but an internview should he unbiased on someone's ethnicity, sex, etc.
- yummypaint 2y ago
  Legal risk is probably the only thing that can stop this encroachment. No harm chatting with a lawyer to see what they think.
bitwize 2y ago
I've started preemptively stipulating to recruiters that I will not accept spyware (including browser extensions and phone apps) or autoproctoring as part of the application process, nor will I subject myself to interviews with or evaluation by a large language model after encountering this nonsense once.
mecha_ghidorah 2y ago
I genuinely don't have a webcam. I mean my work laptop does, but I wouldn't be using my work laptop to interview with people. My home desktop doesn't have one though because I'd literally never use it, and no way I am buying one to take an interview test.
- MissTake 2y ago
  Presumably you have a smartphone? Last I saw even the cheapest of Android phones had some form of “selfie” front facing camera.
  - SapporoChris 2y ago
    https://www.amazon.com/Easyfone-Prime-A6-4G-International-Certified/dp/B09M8DRDL7?th=1 https://www.amazon.com/Easyfone-Prime-A6-4G-International-Ce... Rise of the dumbphones!
next_xibalba 2y ago
The amount of cheating and deception in tech interviews is off the charts. There have been many, many examples commented about on HN over the years. So the webcam requirement seems pretty reasonable. Probably best that you and that company went separate ways.

Terr_ 2y ago

IMO there's a huge difference between "we do this because we had too many fraudulent applicants and this is a compromise compared to having you interview in-person" versus "this is representative of how the entire employment relationship will go." If the former, their fears are not unfounded: Sometimes the person who impressed you in the interview is not actually the same person who arrives for their first day of work. There are also less-audacious forms of interview cheating, where an off-screen cyber-Cyrano is supplying them with answers and/or keyboard-input. That said, I agree that any workplace with a "webcam on at all times for monitoring" policy for employees is one I would leave ASAP. Not just because it's hostile and offensive, but also because it's indicative of the company doing badly while management is busy "rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic."

paxys 2y ago
So you are okay with giving random companies an hour of footage of your face and part of your house just for the privilege of going through their automated screening round?
- VBprogrammer 2y ago
  Emm, yes? What do you think they are going to do with it. They are also considering giving you access to potentially a vast amount of their IP and maybe even customer data.
  - Teever 2y ago
    Whatever they're legally allowed to and I may never know. That's the problem.
    - kevindamm 2y ago
      Wouldn't you need to sign over your name, image and likeness (along with an affidavit that it isn't already exclusively owned) in order for them to legally reuse it? Granted, I've seen tech employee contracts that do include that wording, but it hasn't been in any of the pre-employment paperwork like NDA, etc., in my experience.
      - genocidicbunny 2y ago
        > Wouldn't you need to sign over your name, image and likeness (along with an affidavit that it isn't already exclusively owned) in order for them to legally reuse it Legally? Probably yes. Practically? Fuck no.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    >Emm, yes? What do you think they are going to do with it I don't care what they're going to do with it. They aint having it.
    - VBprogrammer 2y ago
      I just don't understand this at all. Perhaps if they said they intended to record the interview I'd be a little uncomfortable. Otherwise, did you hide your identity in face to face interviews? Do you refuse to enter buildings with CCTV? I've interviewed hundreds of people since COVID / interviews going online. I'm not aware that it's been a problem for a single candidate, I don't even think we say it explicitly.
  - pyrale 2y ago
    Why would they need to give me this for a screening round? Do they expect me to do actual work for them?
ozim 2y ago
I agree. But there still is a line like if I am doing take home assignment I will not install spyware on my personal computer. We can have a zoom/teams call with a person where I share screen if someone wants that with enabled camera as well during coding or for discussion.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  > I will not install spyware on my personal computer. Agreed, if they want to lend me a computer for the exercise, that's another matter. :p It's been a while since I last interviewed in earnest, but my recollection is that those situations (fortunately) correspond with companies that I probably wouldn't want to work for anyway.
- beefnugs 2y ago
  If you expect to be doing take home assignments, you need to know how to use virtual machines, restrictive outgoing white list only firewalls (or at least open snitch) and wipe everything except the source code you create. Between companies / every single use
  - pseudalopex 2y ago
    Anti cheating software can detect virtual machines.
    - hirvi74 2y ago
      If a prospective employer refused to conduct my interview because their anti-cheating software could detect I was using a virtual machine, then I would tell them to go fuck themselves. I would rather clean toilets with dignity than be bitch-whipped into programming for such psychopathic entities.
ryandrake 2y ago
I think the former might strongly imply the latter. If a company can't think of a single way to ensure the person who interviews is actually the person who comes to work the first day (hint, there was a time when webcams did not exist), then that company is probably also inclined to inflict lazy, intrusive surveillance-based schemes on employees after they're hired.
- aljgz 2y ago
  Genuinely interested to know what are some ways you suggest. The times webcams did not exist, coding interviews were done in-person.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    That's what I was getting at. If you want to be sure that the human body who will be present in the office is the one doing the work, then you need to have at least one on-site interview. If the work is fully remote, then does it really even matter? If you hire Person A to provide certain business results, but he actually contracts it out to Person B who does all the work, yet the expected business results are provided, then do you actually care?
    - ang_cire 2y ago
      The stand-in is just for the interview, not their actual daily work.
    - aljgz 2y ago
      1- You don't want an incompetent, non-trustworthy person to work for you. They ruin the culture and affect the entire company. 2- Once they are in, it's not likely that they care as much as the interview time to delegate the job to a person. 3- You might have other non-technical requirements, like a background check, culture fit, personal skills, etc. The person they might delegate the job has not gone through this filter.
    - dnissley 2y ago
      There was a story a couple months ago about HBO accidentally hiring people from North Korea
neilv 2y ago
> "this is representative of how the entire employment relationship will go." Seems like it's great signal of how the company thinks, and will behave. Not necessarily that they'll put all employees under video surveillance, but if they think that interview thing is a good idea, I'd guess probably they'll do numerous other things along the same line of thinking. Occam's Razor possibilities: 1. The company is normally very enlightened and thoughtful and fair, and has a very subtle and nuanced rationale for why they're coming across as invasive and overbearing in this one narrow instance, and their reasons in this bad first-impressions instance (when they should be thinking about first impressions) were simply somehow not explained. 2. The company is going to behave like a jerk.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

tetromino_ 2y ago

In light of interview fraud, it seems reasonable for the interviewer to request that you are live on camera so they can see that you are who you say you are and that you are working alone. The part that would have made me walk away would have been if the video was being recorded and retained, as opposed to merely being watched live.

Maskawanian 2y ago
How would you be able to ensure you that? Even if say, Zoom itself wasn't recording, you can run OBS in the background. Trust runs both ways.

skwirl 2y ago

That doesn’t sound bossware-like at all. It seems completely reasonable to me.

bee_rider 2y ago

Do these companies support Linux or do these recruiters only go after Windows users? There are of course lots of perfectly fine technical folks who are windows-centric, but it still seems like a pretty bad filter to apply to their candidate pool.

silisili 2y ago

Wait just during the interview? That actually sounds completely reasonable.

vundercind 2y ago
It probably also means signing over rights for the recording to be used for training AI by some third party, plus god knows what else.
- VBprogrammer 2y ago
  Oh christ. What absolute nonsense.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

root_axis 2y ago

How can you vet a candidate remotely without having them on the cam? Especially today with all the LLMs, it's pretty much a hiring requirement if you can't bring the candidate in for an interview.

fullspectrumdev 2y ago
Easy, you ask them to talk you through their reasoning. LLM’s are fucking terrible at this for anything nontrivial.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  while you say that, millions of dollars a month are being passed around to do exactly that.. right now in the USA
- root_axis 2y ago
  > LLM’s are fucking terrible at this for anything nontrivial. They seem pretty solid in my experience, in fact, if they shine at anything it's expository blobs of text.
- Kiro 2y ago
  Not my experience at all. I would say humans are much worse at this.
- BeetleB 2y ago
  > Easy, you ask them to talk you through their reasoning. > LLM’s are fucking terrible at this for anything nontrivial. Amusingly, one of the common pieces of advice to limit hallucinations is to ask the LLM to walk through the reasoning.
hnthrow289570 2y ago
We're probably at the point where it's cost effective to pay for traveling-to-interview again, especially for the later-round interviews. That is, unless companies are lying about how much damage bad hiring does. I don't suspect they are, but they apparently can't also do the math to go back to that option.

apimade 2y ago

Cybersecurity nerd here, have talked to many platform and financial company CISO’s, security teams and recruiters over the past few years. Fake interviewees are pretty rampant. We’re getting to the point where presenting yourself in-person to a government representative, agency or a private attestation company will be part of the onboarding process. At this point it looks like it’ll be iris scans. In the US it’s even an issue in-person with H1B’s where they get interviewed and hired online, then someone else shows up. Also the fact that insider threats are almost never budgeted for, and so many companies blanket-approve access to systems like logging systems, customer support systems, source code, etc - means attackers don’t even need to get hired into a very important role to get the data they want.

mistrial9 2y ago
> then someone else shows up someone else shows up ? what is the denominator
- kbrkbr 2y ago
  We've seen that also. You interview someone online, help file the paperwork to get into the country and work visum, and then someone else, a technically much weaker guy, shows up on the first day. We had that twice in the last two years
  - dalyons 2y ago
    wild. So the paperwork and the visa etc was all actually filled out with the details of the weaker guy? Including the photo and suchlike? crazy that gets past the companies immigration lawyers Also, doesnt he just get fired straight away and lose his visa? Seems like very high effort and low chance of success, I must be missing something
    - kbrkbr 2y ago
      This is in EU. You have three months to find a new job, which I found here after your comment made me think [1]. This may be a reasonable gamble, as many companies do probably not expect such a rochade, and do not have detective measures in place. And if that doesn't work, you still have 3 months time to find another job in an environment that favored job seekers at this time. [1] https://expatrist.com/losing-a-job-in-germany-with-eu-blue-card/ https://expatrist.com/losing-a-job-in-germany-with-eu-blue-c...

klntsky 2y ago

Unfortunately this is a requirement nowadays. Scammers learned how to generate realistic CVs and they organize people to pass online interviews for them. After getting the job, they do nothing, get their salary for the first billing period, and leave.

brokenmachine 2y ago
So there's people who are capable enough to actually get jobs like that working for them? They'd need to get more than one job per pay period for that to be more lucrative than just doing one of the jobs they were approved for. Also the money would be split between the scammers. That sounds like more work than actually doing a normal job, but I guess it may be more automatable. I don't know though, interview processes can be very tedious.
- klntsky 2y ago
  > That sounds like more work than actually doing a normal job If one is eligible to do the job in the first place
- kristopolous 2y ago
  Tech interviews? Most are formulaic bullshit. You can coach someone to pass them in a few weeks, that's what the bootcamp phenomena is about.
  - ang_cire 2y ago
    For bad coding interviews, sure. Use a short take-home test for coding stuff, and then do a live interview where you do roleplay and situational questions that make it really easy to tell if someone has actually done this stuff as a job, or is just reciting answers they memorized.
hirvi74 2y ago
> Scammers learned how to generate realistic CVs and they organize people to pass online interviews for them. Can they help me out? Apparently, those scammers have figured out a way to convince companies they are real applicants, yet somehow I, a real applicant, apparently cannot do the same.

surfingdino 2y ago

I was asked to be recorded answering three stupid questions like "what motivates you?", "why do you want to work here?" etc. before attending a multi-stage interview. I never got invited to that interview, and I did wonder if I could take them to court, because my CV showed me as good fit for the job (literally ticked all the boxes), but they clearly rejected me based on the video. (In case you wonder why I thought I was a good fit, I can tell you that I built the tech they were implementing.

hobotime 2y ago
Perhaps during the video they discovered that they didn't like you.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- surfingdino 2y ago
  You're not supposed to see candidates' faces on applications to make sure there is no bias based on looks. Not sure how enforceable that is.
  - ramon156 2y ago
    No law says its illegal, but an internview should he unbiased on someone's ethnicity, sex, etc.
yummypaint 2y ago
Legal risk is probably the only thing that can stop this encroachment. No harm chatting with a lawyer to see what they think.

bitwize 2y ago

I've started preemptively stipulating to recruiters that I will not accept spyware (including browser extensions and phone apps) or autoproctoring as part of the application process, nor will I subject myself to interviews with or evaluation by a large language model after encountering this nonsense once.

mecha_ghidorah 2y ago

I genuinely don't have a webcam. I mean my work laptop does, but I wouldn't be using my work laptop to interview with people. My home desktop doesn't have one though because I'd literally never use it, and no way I am buying one to take an interview test.

MissTake 2y ago
Presumably you have a smartphone? Last I saw even the cheapest of Android phones had some form of “selfie” front facing camera.
- SapporoChris 2y ago
  https://www.amazon.com/Easyfone-Prime-A6-4G-International-Certified/dp/B09M8DRDL7?th=1 https://www.amazon.com/Easyfone-Prime-A6-4G-International-Ce... Rise of the dumbphones!

next_xibalba 2y ago

The amount of cheating and deception in tech interviews is off the charts. There have been many, many examples commented about on HN over the years. So the webcam requirement seems pretty reasonable. Probably best that you and that company went separate ways.