[lovatsofa]

{MOVED TO COMMENTS}

1. I’ve been asked to keep my camera on in most meetings. 2. Like many in the tech world, I generally prefer to keep it off. 3. I was pulled aside over concerns that my LinkedIn profile "looked suspicious." 4. Admittedly, my LinkedIn does look suspicious to anyone who doesn’t communicate with me regularly or hasn't met me recently. 5. As with many developers, I place a premium on privacy, and some of my actions to safeguard it might appear suspect. 6. I’m involved in the cybersecurity community, participating in conferences and learning platforms. 7. The individual who asked me to remove the repository is non-technical. 8. The company I work for is not a tech company. 9. My direct supervisors and decision-makers are also non-technical. 10. I maintain strong relationships with technical team members. 11. I’ve had difficulties navigating remote work dynamics with non-technical colleagues. 12. I speak up less than I used to—this could be interpreted as disengagement. 13. In the past, I struggled to make measurable progress or explain setbacks, which hasn’t reflected well on me. 14. I’ve made no secret of the fact that Quality Engineering is not my passion, preferring development work instead—a comment that’s occasionally thrown back at me: "I know you’d rather be doing X, but..." 15. I have fewer than 10 years of experience in the industry and appear quite young. 16. I’ve been with the company for several years. 17. I work remotely. 18. I attempted to explain our CI/CD pipelines, the importance of QE, and why I believe I need access to the repo.

[ecshafer]

Not exactly what you are talking about. But I strongly prefer cameras on during meetings for everyone (unless its some huge meeting, demo, townhall etc). It gives more social feedback, easier to read cues, and makes a more enjoyable process. Its a good default for a company. If its only you then something weird might be going on.

[atoav]

As an educator the worst times I had were during Covid talking into the void of black squares. I am all for privacy and students should not be forced to show their private spaces, but I guess the seminars suffered due to the lack of feedback.

[comprev]

From my experience working in tech over the last few decades it's often been the "difficult" developers who refuse to switch their webcams on during meetings (excluding larger company town hall, demos, etc).

People don't realise quite how much communication is done through body language.

OP - what privacy concerns do you have using a webcam with colleagues? Functionality like blurring backgrounds and having "wallpaper" via software is very good these days.

[codingdave]

Over the last few decades? So you've been around long enough to remember prior to 5 years ago, when video calls were not the norm, and voice-only conference calls were. We all got by just fine that way, for a long time.

I'd say that yes - video gives more info and context. But that additional info is not required for effective communication. And it can really lag people with slower internet connections, which makes it more difficult for the conversations to go smoothly. I'd rather have a lag-free voice conversation any day.

[lovatsofa]

While it's not explicitly stated, I would like to respectfully disagree with the notion that developers who avoid webcam use in virtual meetings are being "difficult" or impairing communication by omitting visual cues. Although non-verbal signals can enhance interactions, the insistence on webcam use neglects deeper issues of psychological comfort and privacy, which are particularly pertinent for individuals from minority groups or those with lower social status. For some, not displaying their environment might actually level the playing field.

Your point about body language is well-taken, but it’s crucial to recognize that much of human communication is rooted in biological signals that webcams simply cannot capture. These include oscillatory patterns in our nervous systems, pheromones, and pupil dilation—subtle cues that are crucial for face-to-face interactions but are lost in digital communication. If we find ourselves overly concerned about body language in pixelated, compressed, and inherently artificial digital formats, we might need to reconsider if remote work is suitable for us.

Moreover, it’s important to acknowledge that not everyone interprets social cues in the same way. Neurodivergent individuals, for example, may struggle more with deciphering body language, suggesting that the capacity to do so is not universal but rather a privilege.

Have you had a chance to watch We Live in Public? This documentary delves into an early internet experiment where constant surveillance led to significant stress and self-censorship among participants. Though not a direct analogue to virtual meetings, the film highlights the psychological toll of persistent observation—a toll that does not necessarily foster better communication or collaboration.

In my own experience, I've worked with several developers who prefer to keep their cameras off, and I've observed no detrimental impact on the quality of their work or on team dynamics. If you've noticed that developers who disable their cameras tend to be problematic, it might be worth revisiting hiring practices to ensure they align more closely with the diverse preferences and needs of tech talent.

As for my personal preference to keep the camera off, I prefer not to share too many details, but I've included links to several studies that discuss the broader implications of webcam use along with a more recent study about a potential camera alternative, biosignal data.

- https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10599432 - https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2021-77825-003 - https://tmb.apaopen.org/pub/nonverbal-overload/release/2 - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13678868.2022.2... - https://www.mdpi.com/2673-8104/3/1/10

[readyplayernull]

I was once silently accused of industrial espionage, it took me some time to understand the reasons why they laid me off and it's mostly about them not finding me "transparent." They set different traps, and they couldn't find proof of me spying, but I simply didn't align with the behaviour of a trusted employee. Start looking for a new job.

[lovatsofa]

If you’re willing to elaborate, I’m curious about what they cited as evidence for your supposed lack of transparency?

[readyplayernull]

That's what I meant with "silently accused", they said nothing about it. I noticed my team mates changed their behavior, a manager started bringing things-you-do-wrong, and there were several strange events before they laid me off, like (fictional) products about to be released. Then I was suddendly disconnected and let go. I didn't actually cared and quickly got another job, but ofcourse that was a bad ending and I had to makeup my resume to avoid reference contamination. When I realized the products were fake and did a retrospection of all the events and behaviors, I understood what was all that about.

They knew I have different skills on electronics and hacking. I'm sure they looked for mics and cameras literally everywhere. Once I took care of a stalker that called my wife by hacking a political reporter's email and planting his phone number, so I didn't waste time with the police. Telling stories doesn't help, it's better to hide certain skills.

[lovatsofa]

I'm sorry, that sounds both difficult and disconcerting.

"It's better to hide certain skills."

This perspective hadn't occurred to me, and it's likely a more pragmatic approach than my own, which is to sing my interests from the rooftops and scribble them in chalk, hoping to find other like-minded individuals. A paradoxical approach, driven by the harsh effects of loneliness on well-being, one that might need reconsideration.

[quotient]

They don't trust you. You should go and look for a new job.