[BeetleB]

> You’d no longer be able to disent, or discuss anything non-work related with even the slightest expectation of privacy.

When I joined the workforce a long time ago, I went in with the mindset that: Their property, their equipment, their right to monitor (or even keylog).

I was pleasantly surprised to find that not to be the case, but I've always believed in their right to do so.

Why do people expect to have a right to do non-work related stuff on the job? Every company I've worked for states in the employment contract/policies what you can and cannot do on the job. They never enforce it to the extent that they outline in the policies, but it's usually clear cut.

If you want to rant about the company, do it outside the company! Or at a physical water cooler. When coworkers want to rant to me about the company, they don't use Slack/Teams. They message my personal, non-work number.

[Miraste]

While you have the right practical approach, I do believe companies should face harsh regulations preventing this kind of monitoring. It has almost universally negative effects, from enabling union-busting to exploitation to all kinds of discrimination and favoritism.

[wavefunction]

>Why do people expect to have a right to do non-work related stuff on the job?

Like use the restroom? Personally, I'm not a slave. I am getting more and more used to the idea of having to push back on those who do exhibit such a mentality. Y'all are beginning to become a threat to the rest of us.

[gtowey]

Meta: look, you don't have to wear a diaper while you work, but those that do are 87% more likely to get promoted! The choice is yours!

[jbxntuehineoh]

the fact that the employees have voluntarily consented to wearing the diapers means that wearing the diaper is better than any alternative available to them, which proves that forcing employees to wear diapers maximizes total social utility

[zepppotemkin]

It's kind of funny to see how people here are reacting to the world they built when it finally comes to them

[simplyluke]

It's absolutely their right, but it's a dramatic cultural departure from the history of the company.

In the late 2010s/pre-covid it was very common for employees to port their personal cell phone number to their work phone and just not have a personal cell phone. The internal culture at the company was remarkably open for their size.

That all went away by the time I left in 2022, and from what I've heard it has only accelerated into an employee-hostile environment. I'm not shocked at this move.

[reverius42]

What do you think caused the change from being so employee-friendly to so employee-hostile?

[simplyluke]

I won't pretend to be a mind-reader of the executives involved. I was a line engineer, so effectively watching from the sidelines. It was temporally close to Sheryl Sandberg leaving her role as COO, but I have no insights into how much that was a factor, a reaction, or neither.

From my perspective a lot of it was downstream of over-hiring in the post-pandemic frenzy. It's hard to maintain that culture while doing large layoffs, and there's no incentive for them to do so beyond the longer term reality that many of their best employees have left and they're increasingly seen as a place to earn a top paycheck in between layoffs.

[sho_hn]

They were employee-friendly when they wanted to hire. It's been years of layoffs, with another 10% from May onward.

[sho_hn]

Engineers build tools for other people. The profession exists in support of human life. We make the substrate that civilization runs on.

If humans are the point, this also goes for keeping work environments humane.

[andrekandre]

  > The profession exists in support of human life.

it very obviously supports capital and if human life also then its just a side-effect*

*this is just an observation, not a normative claim

[catcowcostume]

> We make the substrate that civilization runs on.

That's a bit self-aggrandizing - especially for Software engineers.

[sho_hn]

I did mean engineers in general (I work with and have great respect for mechanical engineers, for example, and my folks were in construction), but I don't it's necessarily self-aggrandizing, either. I've worked on chat software and know people who met using my software and got married and have kids. I've worked on software somewhere in the chain of publishing important ideas, or just to share a joke.

I don't mean to say that this software was the only means of doing either of these things, of course. But we do make tools that people use regularly when living their lives. Sometimes it's just about being reliable or not getting in the way. The modern equivalent of flintstones and sharing stories around the fire.

It's about taking your work seriously - the qualities of what we make matter - and feeling some sense of purpose. And knowing who you're doing it for. I don't think that's being self-important.

[whateverboat]

1. But they are not paying for your training which you are bringing to the company. 2. About ranting about company, it is difficult to organize. That's why unions existed, and that's why unions were allowed to meet in work hours.

[cyclopeanutopia]

I cannot understand how can anyone hold such outrageously antihuman beliefs.

Governments, corporations and any other organizations should all exist FOR the people, not the other way around.

American-style capitalism truly is a disease.

[BeetleB]

So, you're saying if I work at a factory, I should be able to use the factory equipment to build my stuff?

[pydry]

If you work at the factory you should be able to complain about the boss when he's out of earshot without him snooping.

If that's something he cant handle he might have a problem with personal accountability.

[sgustard]

I've definitely worked places where I used the company Xerox machine to print up 50,000 "Unionize Now" fliers.

[ashley95]

There is no clean separation between personal and work. It is also more efficient to blend them (if I expect a baseline level of non-snoopiness on my work computer, I will text my boyfriend from my work laptop... obviously beneficial for the firm).

Either way when it comes to ranting about the company: many workplaces don't have a watercooler where all your team mates congregate (e.g. remote/different offices). Also what, you'll rant about confidential work projects over non-work texts?

[Frieren]

> When I joined the workforce a long time ago, I went in with the mindset that: Their property, their equipment, their right to monitor (or even keylog).

Why do you renounce to your rights to privacy so easily? You are an employee not a slave, sometimes I have the feeling that Americans do not know the difference.

> If you want to rant about the company, do it outside the company!

You have a right to organize inside the company, and for that the most efficient easy way are the internal company communications. Communications with the purpose of unionizing should be private and the company accessing them should be punished, and if needed C level should go to prison for their crimes.

How do you organize otherwise? How do you contact your colleagues about grievances about the company?

It is mind blowing to see this capitulation on personal rights. It seems that corporate rights are more important than anything else in the USA. It is a pure dystopia.

[miltonlost]

You would love the world of Severance! Drop your humanity and individuality at the door. Become a mindless drone

[satvikpendem]

Fitting username.

[raw_anon_1111]

I don’t care if a company monitors which websites I go to on a work computer, what applications I run or what I say on Slack.

On the other hand I would be looking for another job if they had keyloggers or were taking screenshots even if they said anything about me shopping on Amazon or randomly browsing Hacker News or any website that wasn’t gaming or Netflix during work hours.

Heck I use to travel a lot more for business and I used my work laptop for Netflix and other streaming services in the hotel.

As long as I’m meeting performance standards it shouldn’t matter.

[overfeed]

This comments pairs really well with the song Sixteen Tons - I cued the song[1] and re-read your comment.

More substantively: I would like the employer/employee transaction to be one of buing/selling labor. To me, training AI on keystrokes nudges the deal towards selling one's "soul" next to other dystopian tropes like brain implants and work toilets that analyze excretions.

You are correct that employers own the laptops and can install anything they want, which is why I never do anything other than work there - the farthest I will go is participate in employer-hosted shitpost groups/channels, which are not anonymous, and they are free to train their models on that.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1980WfKC0o

[SecretDreams]

Companies pay their employees to build things. They do not pay their employees for their likeliness or the inner workings of their brains. Meta is trying to get the latter by keystroke tracking. It is an overreach in that context.

If they just want to monitor your computer for the purposes of productivity tracking, that is in their right, imo - just a shitty thing to do.

[barrkel]

You come with a belief, then you wonder why other people don't have the belief. The belief was exogenous for you. Why do you believe the belief is not exogenous for others?

I guess you never talk to coworkers about your weekend. That's on the job. I see you mention the water cooler; how dare you talk there?

[anonymousDan]

What a pathetic quisling attitude to life.