November 16, 2015 at 9:17 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Private Data
November 17, 2015 at 2:07 am
Given the US push back when the EU data protection laws were being negotiated, given that Russian companies have basically ejected UK firms and taken over legal entity partnerships (twice to my knowledge), given that China have jailed foreign nationals who discovered corruption in Chinese subsidiaries and much more besides, I have little faith that anything will be decided upon then enforced fairly.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
November 17, 2015 at 4:44 am
[font="Verdana"]With current environmental factors and growing demand of weaker privacy, its pretty hard to bring all world stakeholders to a single agenda. We fear assigning roles and rules not assumed for now... !
Despite if any agreement; it would be violated considerably. :ermm:[/font]
November 17, 2015 at 6:35 am
I agree with most of this, except for data 'custodians' receiving exemptions. 'I was just following orders' is no excuse for abandoning personal moral and legal responsibility. Maybe lesser (lessening) of penalties, given that pushback could result in loss of current and future livelihood, but not eliminating them altogether.
November 17, 2015 at 7:10 am
Microsoft? Come on. They currently are the absolute worst vendor for spying! Sounds like a false flag argument.
"Look at us, we value your privacy." While spying on everything on your computer and selling it to the highest bidder.
Dave
November 17, 2015 at 7:11 am
Abrar Ahmad_ (11/17/2015)
[font="Verdana"]With current environmental factors and growing demand of weaker privacy, its pretty hard to bring all world stakeholders to a single agenda. We fear assigning roles and rules not assumed for now... !Despite if any agreement; it would be violated considerably. :ermm:[/font]
Perhaps evidence of highlighting the issue (e.g. emails) would suffice. The absence of such communications would indicate culpability.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
November 17, 2015 at 7:14 am
Abrar Ahmad_ (11/17/2015)
[font="Verdana"]With current environmental factors and growing demand of weaker privacy, its pretty hard to bring all world stakeholders to a single agenda. We fear assigning roles and rules not assumed for now... !Despite if any agreement; it would be violated considerably. :ermm:[/font]
Agreed. The MSM in the US started pushing theories over the weekend, that encryption caused the terrorism in France last week. Of course, that wasn't the worst attempt to champion a cause by blaming terrorism on something they don't like, Sanders was actually stupid enough to blame so called global warming...
How do we expect the media and our governments to maintain control over the people if we don't let them spy on us and know what we think. We all know they are doing what is best for us, they tell us so.
Dave
November 17, 2015 at 7:25 am
Xavon (11/17/2015)
I agree with most of this, except for data 'custodians' receiving exemptions. 'I was just following orders' is no excuse for abandoning personal moral and legal responsibility. Maybe lesser (lessening) of penalties, given that pushback could result in loss of current and future livelihood, but not eliminating them altogether.
Within reason it's often not really the job of DBA type people to understand exactly why they're are being asked to store and manipulate certain data or understand the exact legal ramifications of doing so. At some point we have to be able to assume that the higher ups have already answered these questions and determined they are acceptable.
And I do happen to agree with the article that many times 'I was just following orders' is a perfectly acceptable reason for doing something that may ultimately end up being immoral or questionably legal.
November 17, 2015 at 8:07 am
djackson 22568 (11/17/2015)
Microsoft? Come on. They currently are the absolute worst vendor for spying! Sounds like a false flag argument."Look at us, we value your privacy." While spying on everything on your computer and selling it to the highest bidder.
I'd trust Microsoft to hold my private data before I'd trust Google or Facebook. Microsoft wants to sell you software and services; that their business model, and I get that. Google and Facebook on the other hand want to give you software and services for free, so they can then sell the data they collect about you to third parties.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
November 17, 2015 at 11:10 am
Who owns and controls what data about whom will end up being one of the big issues in the 21st century. Vizio TVs were just busted for taking pictures of people while watching shows (without permission). Experian etc. keep your records and own them (you don't). Windows 10 sends tons of info to Microsoft and it's free (who can you trust now).
As for morals. Everyone is responsible for their own actions including us. I seem to recall after World War II quite a few people said they were just following orders. I believe a few of them were hung anyway.
November 17, 2015 at 11:23 am
Microsoft is not a monolithic thing. there are certainly groups gathering lots of information, and it's a little silly in Windows 10. That being said, some of the articles on the topic are a little overblown. However I don't believe in any case, MS is selling your information to others. I may be wrong, but I think it's a lot of stuff internally.
Other companies are doing lots as well, mostly to get better metrics, but they haven't thought through the downsides.
However those collections are secondary to what MS is proposing here in limiting government.
In terms of the morality of "I was following orders." I think there's a fairly fundamental difference between killing someone in WWII and allowing someone to host pirated images, pornography, or some other objectionable material. If you work at Dropbox, do you protest, lose your job, or get fired for complaining about a user's data? Or do you manage the bits as you're supposed to and let someone else sort the legalities?
I'm not advocating anything, but I do think that IT people don't necessarily get to, nor should they, be responsible for what a company allows. Certainly you can quit if you find things objectionable, but we can be coerced to manage bits we don't want to. I'm not sure that someone should be penalized for managing those bits when it wasn't their decision to do so.
November 17, 2015 at 12:07 pm
I agree there are differences. But I think everyone has to draw the line somewhere. For me the line is when I know some is actually getting hurt, for example child p**.
November 17, 2015 at 12:14 pm
Eric M Russell (11/17/2015)
djackson 22568 (11/17/2015)
Microsoft? Come on. They currently are the absolute worst vendor for spying! Sounds like a false flag argument."Look at us, we value your privacy." While spying on everything on your computer and selling it to the highest bidder.
I'd trust Microsoft to hold my private data...
It isn't your data if Microsoft (or Google, et al) have access to it. It certainly is no longer private.
Dave
November 18, 2015 at 12:27 am
With regards to "just following orders", I agree that everyone should have their own red line. John's example is one that probably is beyond the red line for most of us, if not all, but Steve's examples are ones that many might ignore or raise with the appropriate internal representative and forget.
As IT professionals we are not here to police the content but as citizens we are obliged to tackle serious issues (such as CP as called out by John). I feel that the serious issues must be raised regardless of management whilst other matters can be dealt with by raising internally thereby passing on the responsibility.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
November 18, 2015 at 8:05 am
For an organization (like DropBox, Google, or Microsoft) who hosts personal data, I think they should respect privacy in a way similar to apartment building managers. First, the data is supposed to be encrypted, so there is no reason for DropBox to be aware that a specific user is hosting illegal digital data. They can't "peek through the key hole" to proactively look for illegal activity going on in their users accounts without violating the explicit or presumptive expectation of privacy that they have with their customers.
Only when authorities show up with a court issued search warrant for a specific customer account should they provide they key and let them in. I know that allowing police unrestricted (or just more liberal) access to peek inside email accounts (or apartments) would help prevent crime in some cases, but crime prevention is not the be all end all of society.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply