or to think twice about applying for certain jobs or to certain colleges:
http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/06/10585353-state-agencies-colleges-demand-applicants-facebook-passwords
QuoteIf you think privacy settings on your Facebook and Twitter accounts guarantee future employers or schools can't see your private posts, guess again.
Employers and colleges find the treasure-trove of personal information hiding behind password-protected accounts and privacy walls just too tempting, and increasingly, they are demanding full access from applicants and students.
But of course, you spags all LOVE America, right, so there's no need to get all hot and bothered about this. It's all for the best!
That's MY American Dream!
I mean, we shouldn't at all forward some helpful hints to the University of North Carolina. They don't need our help at all.
That's insane.
And a GREAT reason to set up fake accounts.
Uh... Roe vs. Wade?
Keep the man out of my profile!
Seriously though that's fucked up.
Easiest way in the world around this:
Set your primary account email to a personal email, that you use only for Facebook. Set privacy settings so that only people you friend can see any profile information, including pictures of you.
Tell employers "what Facebook account?"
Easier: no facebook.
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 06, 2012, 05:44:19 PM
Easier: no facebook.
Band promotion. :/
I've considered axing mine in the past, but it's a useful thing for me.
A much easier thing to do would be to tell whoever's asking to GO FUCK THEMSELVES.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 06, 2012, 05:51:53 PM
A much easier thing to do would be to tell whoever's asking to GO FUCK THEMSELVES.
I agree.
I also see this as an extension of the Drug Warrior / "judge them by their pee" mentality.
Specifically, that the corporate powers can use searches which would be illegal if done by a government agent without a warrant, because the laws against them only apply to government actors.
I will be telling anyone who asks to be fucking themselves with a cactus.
Or I could be giving them my unused fake account password.
Coyote, has several FB accounts.
Lets not forget that Facebook are currently searching for ways to monetize their service.
It is only a matter of time until employers can pay to override your privacy settings and snoop you out. This will likely not be done on a case by case basis, but instead perhaps facebook changes its terms of service to allow security companies to do so (and the police etc) under the guise of fighting cybercrime/identity theft/whatever. Security companies by a license from facebook - a subscription service of some sort - and then companies and universities can pay those companies to get the scoop on your social life.
It might not even be that complicated but I expect it is coming and I suspect something like the above scenario would slip under the radar of most of the media because, well, who wants to stop Scotland Yard tracking down cyberbullies who drive kids to suicide or whatever the controversy of the month is.
Implying facebook doesn't hand over info to the police already.
The new FB pages are actually designed to make it easier for the intelligence analysts to data-mine you, which they sold as a "great way to share information with your friends and family". The last 3 iterations of the page distinctly show this trend. At one point, your profile page looked like a case-file cover-page.....
All the bosses I've had since Facebook crawled out of the unimaginable depths of horror have way more... embarrasing... content on there than I ever had.
I don't know I'f I'm smart with what I share or lucky with bosses.
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 06, 2012, 06:28:12 PM
Implying facebook doesn't hand over info to the police already.
They don't have to. The police have a master password. At least the ones in Maine do, I can't speak for other places. But I've personally witnessed it in use there.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 07, 2012, 04:58:34 AM
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 06, 2012, 06:28:12 PM
Implying facebook doesn't hand over info to the police already.
They don't have to. The police have a master password. At least the ones in Maine do, I can't speak for other places. But I've personally witnessed it in use there.
Makes perfect sense to me.
I have a problem with the entire concept of accepting that the corporation who employs you is also paying for the rights to your personal life...that's essentially what this is.
Corporations have had a long tradition of ownership of the intellectual property rights over their workers free time. I can almost guarantee that every single one of us who works white-collar jobs has, at some point, been required to sign one or more of the following:
1. A non-disclosure agreement (mostly to protect corporate and client secrets but some of which are a thinly-veiled bypass of whistleblower laws and a way to make you legally finacially liable for badmouthing the company)
2. A discovery/background check agreement which states they dig through any part of your life, using any methods they choose (calling your friends, hiring a P.I., criminal history, banking and credit reports) at any point during your employ or consideration for employ or promotion and for any reason.
3. Drug/toxicology screen including pretty invasive stuff like follicle, sweat patch, blood, etc. You agree they also have the right to enter you into an "ongoing drug screen program" which means they can make you submit to a surprise whizz quiz AAAAND enter your (medical) data into a database accessed by other employers.
4. An at-will employer/non-liability agreement which pretty much states that the company can verbally abuse you or fire you simply because you drive the wrong kind of car or who you're fucking and you can't say shit.
5. An Implied Intellectual Property Rights agreement that pretty much means if you're an engineer at Asshat Inc. and while you're on vacation with your family, you suddenly solve the room-temperature superconductivity problem on your own time, with your own equipment, they own it. This is often extended to discoveries or inventions you hatch within 3-10 years after you are no longer with the company. This one started out on the up-and-up to avoid high-white-collar employees from using company time, equip or discoveries as the springboard for their own profitable ventures but during the oil spill, I had to make my fucking janitors sign one. I've also seen ones that require the employee to declare and surrender all projects, ideas and inventions to the company that occurred prior to employment.
6. The Honesty Questionnaire and The Temperament Suitability Test (*ahem* Read: psychological profile. Another invasive, medical diagnostic that Corps have managed to annex into their domain).
7. The giant, catch-all employee contract/agreement which (read ALLLLLLL that fine print) covers everything from agreeing not to discuss your salary with anyone to circumventing labor laws (*cough* Limited Brands *cough cough*) to the right to do a physical search of your handbag, its contents or to require you to surrender all electronic devices brought onto the company property or used for any and all company purposes including cell phones, personal computers, etc (does this ambiguous, all encompassing language mean if your boss emails or calls you on your personal and later is discovered to have leaked info about the company to the SEC, you can be sued if you don't surrender your shit?). I've seen ridiculous paradoxical "team player type," "eagle eye" bullshit--like requiring you to keep abreast of company, industry and competitor trends but disallowing you to utilize company time or resources to do it. Just a whooooole bunch of indulgent, kagaroo-court, child-emperor "I can make you do whatever I want" hoops to jump through designed to make workers keep their voices a little more hushed, relax a little bit less, feel a little more frightened of termination, lawsuit or yet more hoops to jump through just to collect a paychecque and feed their families.
I've seen these, I've signed these, I've had to make my employees sign these. I am filled with vitriol when it comes to this particular family of topics.
Note: You, (hereafter, referred to as "the employee") agree that data collected from all tests, questionnaires, screens, background and personality research, employee monitoring devices (keyloggers, cameras) by Totalitarian Corp, LLC (Hereafter referred to as "The Company") become the property of The Company and its affiliates (including, but not limited to contractors hired to collect, aggregate or otherwise utilize said data, partner companies, legal firms, data collection/reporting agencies (read: blackballing agencies), advertising firms, etc and its retention, use, transfer or deletion will be performed at the sole discretion of The Company and its affiliates and that neither The Company or its affiliates are responsible or liable for any injury, loss or damages, real or implied, to the employee, the employee's friends, family or associates, dead or living, or to the employee's affiliated companies, holdings or other places of employ, future, past or present.
Sign and date______________________________
You can't ask a woman if she's married though. YAY, RIGHTS!
Well, in some cases I think it is completely warranted. For example any profession where you are dealing with kids. Teachers, day-car workers, camp counselors....It would be nuts for these folks to NOT go through some kind of background check. Anyone can check a box that says they've never been convicted of a felony, I personally am fine with a little more depth in that particular area.
Trolling Facebook is a whole different animal though. Background checks typically are getting into whether or not you might be a criminal. Trolling Facebook is about screening for personality quirks, likes/dislikes, etc. And I think it's really going too far with college students.
But there are instances where some of these checks are a good thing to have in place.
Quote from: What's-His-Name? on March 07, 2012, 02:59:13 PM
Well, in some cases I think it is completely warranted. For example any profession where you are dealing with kids. Teachers, day-car workers, camp counselors....It would be nuts for these folks to NOT go through some kind of background check. Anyone can check a box that says they've never been convicted of a felony, I personally am fine with a little more depth in that particular area.
Trolling Facebook is a whole different animal though. Background checks typically are getting into whether or not you might be a criminal. Trolling Facebook is about screening for personality quirks, likes/dislikes, etc. And I think it's really going too far with college students.
But there are instances where some of these checks are a good thing to have in place.
Sure. Prior work history upon consideration for employ, criminal BG for people dealing with kids, guns or airplanes. Before you get promoted to guns or airplanes, though they'd
damned well better know what you're like on the job without having to read your LiveJournal or find out how much you're paying for your mortgage.
And it's not limited to crucial or high-risk positions or I'd be a little more likely to believe it comes from honest practice and safety concerns but they're making kids at
McDonald's sign and submit to this type of shit too. WHY THE FUCK DOES A 17 YEAR OLD KID NEED TO SUBMIT TO A DRUG SCREEN AND A PSYCH WORKUP TO MAKE A BIG MAC?
It's data collection and it's a spirit of indentured servitude, plain and simple: "These are our terms and conditions. having a job is a privilege, not a right and while you're sucking off
our teat, you'll play by
our rules. You don't like it? Don't work here. Go somewhere else." Problem is,
everyone's doing it so it's becoming industry standard that you'd better watch yourself on your "free" time or BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN.
And the truth is; the people with police records are still getting
jobs. McDonald's and WalMart are
still hiring them, just for a little less
pay. Knowledge is power. Knowing that you once popped pos on a tox screen when you were in High School only means you're cheaper. And for the lowest paid workers, that means there's a good chance they'll have to ride the crest of Fed mandated minimum wage requirements welllllll into their 40s and 50s.
No, these companies just wanna
know. And they wanna be allowed to
sell or
profit from what they now know. They wanna know and they feel
entitled because no one is stopping them. Those who need to the most can't afford to rock the boat and those who have the means to rock the boat are on the receiving end of the benefits.
Quote from: navkat on March 07, 2012, 03:32:47 PM
Sure. Prior work history upon consideration for employ, criminal BG for people dealing with kids, guns or airplanes. Before you get promoted to guns or airplanes, though they'd damned well better know what you're like on the job without having to read your LiveJournal or find out how much you're paying for your mortgage.
This is probably to trusting-the-govermenty for Americans, but around here we have, IIRC, a pretty good system for this. The potential employer tells the government what the job will be. The government looks at the criminal record of the candidate, and they report any
relevant items to the potential employer.
Quote from: el sjaako on March 08, 2012, 10:13:07 AM
Quote from: navkat on March 07, 2012, 03:32:47 PM
Sure. Prior work history upon consideration for employ, criminal BG for people dealing with kids, guns or airplanes. Before you get promoted to guns or airplanes, though they'd damned well better know what you're like on the job without having to read your LiveJournal or find out how much you're paying for your mortgage.
This is probably to trusting-the-govermenty for Americans, but around here we have, IIRC, a pretty good system for this. The potential employer tells the government what the job will be. The government looks at the criminal record of the candidate, and they report any relevant items to the potential employer.
That'd be great if we had a truly representative government here. The problem is: "Government" and "Corporate Interest" are analogous terms. All that would happen if we put the Government in charge would be that the data would be used and shared with some pet corporate interests, more legislation would be passed to give the gov't power to obtain and share more of it and lobbyists would see to it that mom n pop employers or weaker competitors would have to pay more than large "job creating" corporations to access the system through unethical manipulation of the tax code.
I guess one could argue that both our corrupt government and many of the corporations already
have much of this data anyway, they just still have to be "in the closet" about it for the time being.
man this sounds like an april fools joke :o
Quote from: aanti on March 08, 2012, 06:19:30 PM
man this sounds like an april fools joke :o
It is. And the joke's on us.
Sometimes I laugh until I can't stop screaming.
Quote from: What's-His-Name? on March 07, 2012, 02:59:13 PM
Well, in some cases I think it is completely warranted. For example any profession where you are dealing with kids. Teachers, day-car workers, camp counselors....It would be nuts for these folks to NOT go through some kind of background check. Anyone can check a box that says they've never been convicted of a felony, I personally am fine with a little more depth in that particular area.
Trolling Facebook is a whole different animal though. Background checks typically are getting into whether or not you might be a criminal. Trolling Facebook is about screening for personality quirks, likes/dislikes, etc. And I think it's really going too far with college students.
But there are instances where some of these checks are a good thing to have in place.
I'm okay with this, as there is no expectation of privacy.
I am okay with certain jobs requiring the facebook thing. I am not okay with certain jobs requiring that you turn over your diary. The line is somewhere in between those two situations.
so either dont use fb or use a fake account or use it without really posting content that some folks/companies/etc should never see since it doesnt matter in the end which people you share to..
i use diaspora for internet fun, its a gold mine for finding things on the internet that matter to me
I disagree with you for once, Rog.
My thought is if you put it out there where an employer can see it, that's your oh shit.
If your employer pretends to be a hot blonde from Destin and you friend them, that's your oh shit.
Requiring you to hand over your password or log in and let them peek at your protected entries is crossing the line. Some people honestly use FB to keep in touch with friends and family and their posts, comments, pictures and shares are an ongoing reflection of that. For some of us, FB has replaced the big, giant "reply all" email conversations and meme-mails of the late 90s until 2003 when MySpace got big...except now, there are a lot more people on the "CC" list in on the joke/convo. Would it be okay for an employer to require you to log onto your email and poke around in your folder of stupid shit you shared back and forth with your college buddies?
The thing of it is: if you protect your entries to only the people on your list, no matter how big that group is, it is implied that your posts are intended for just them.
There's a saying in the legal world: "You can indict a ham sandwich." What that means is that you can take the shit people say and write and twist it to make it seem like they've brazenly admitted to committing the most heinous acts. A three-second video of a girl in a rainbow shirt, taking an aspirin can be made to seem like she's dropping acid in front of small children in the right context.
Bearing that in mind, this sort of thing isn't going to be effective at screening for assholes. You aren't going to catch rapists, molesters, sociopaths or heroin junkies on facebook because people with real fucked-up character flaws are going to be painstakingly obsessive about covering their tracks and hiding their narcissism and BiPolar rage. Like that show, Dexter, they're they ones who will appear pin-neat and cherubic. The rest of us are just going to be indicted on some silly shit we said or did when we were young, immature, sick, relaxed, angry, upset, overly ecstatic or intoxicated and in our own homes or non-business spaces.
Quote from: Cain on March 06, 2012, 04:54:45 PM
Easiest way in the world around this:
Set your primary account email to a personal email, that you use only for Facebook. Set privacy settings so that only people you friend can see any profile information, including pictures of you.
Tell employers "what Facebook account?"
Except that, as far as I've understood, FB has the tendency to, just as you think you locked everything out privacy wise, introduce a new feature that defaults to being public until you opt out.
Quote from: An Twidsteoir on March 06, 2012, 05:45:57 PM
Quote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 06, 2012, 05:44:19 PM
Easier: no facebook.
Band promotion. :/
I've considered axing mine in the past, but it's a useful thing for me.
So, use it for band promotion. And only that. No leaving comments, posting photos or status updates unless it's strictly band-related.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 07, 2012, 04:58:34 AMQuote from: Queen Gogira Pennyworth, BSW on March 06, 2012, 06:28:12 PMImplying facebook doesn't hand over info to the police already.
They don't have to. The police have a master password. At least the ones in Maine do, I can't speak for other places. But I've personally witnessed it in use there.
Got any more info about this? I believe you, but this is REALLY interesting.
Is it really just a password? Or some special software attached to it?
Cause if there'd exist a FB password that would open up all FB accts all over the world ... wow.
If it requires special software, it's still fucked up, but at least that way they could use proper cryptographic techqniques to limit access instead of just a password (even if it's long and complex--a random 512 bit private key is longer and complexer).
I assumed ECH meant that they have a master account that isn't restricted by blocks, friending or privacy controls.
Two things to consider:
1. If you put something on facebook that you aren't comfortable with everybody being able to see, you are an idiot. It's not like a diary, it's like a billboard.
2. This is still retarded. It's essentially bullying people into giving up their right to a non-work life. People shouldn't have to worry about saying something controversial because in 3 years an employer who disagrees might not hire them.
Quote from: Oysters Rockefeller on March 08, 2012, 08:17:22 PM
Two things to consider:
1. If you put something on facebook that you aren't comfortable with everybody being able to see, you are an idiot. It's not like a diary, it's like a billboard.
2. This is still retarded. It's essentially bullying people into giving up their right to a non-work life. People shouldn't have to worry about saying something controversial because in 3 years an employer who disagrees might not hire them.
This is a nice way to sum up something I've been thinking about a lot. It's this: if George Orwell were to write 1984 today, he wouldn't call it "thoughtcrime," he'd call it "thoughtproperty" or "thoughtdebt."
Quote from: navkat on March 08, 2012, 07:52:13 PM
I disagree with you for once, Rog.
My thought is if you put it out there where an employer can see it, that's your oh shit.
If your employer pretends to be a hot blonde from Destin and you friend them, that's your oh shit.
Requiring you to hand over your password or log in and let them peek at your protected entries is crossing the line.
I agree. What I should have said was that anything the public can see, they can ask to see, ie, "what name do you use on FB?".
Demanding to have full password access is unreasonable, as private entries have an implied expectation of privacy.
Quote from: navkat on March 08, 2012, 08:07:09 PM
I assumed ECH meant that they have a master account that isn't restricted by blocks, friending or privacy controls.
OK that makes a bit more sense.
http://laughingsquid.com/facebook-id-card/
(http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/facebook-id-card-20120227-122506.jpg)
The Facebook Identity Card by FB Bureau was created by German artist Tobias Leingruber. FB Identity Cards are being distributed at Supermarkt Berlin on March 2.*
*Tobias has since been threatened by major lawsuits from FB, and has stopped producing the cards.
wow. We're all fucked.
The basis behind the lawsuit was "Fucker's beaten us to it. Sue him or hire him or both or something"
Quote from: Junkenstein on March 09, 2012, 12:56:36 AM
The basis behind the lawsuit was "Fucker's beaten us to it. Sue him or hire him or both or something"
I thought exactly the same thing.
Scary because they MIGHT JUST DO THAT.
What's scary is that having an online profile tied to your Social Security # which will pop up when your RFID-enabled Driver License (http://www.autospies.com/news/Lawmakers-Urge-Removal-Of-Federal-High-Tech-Tracking-Requirements-For-Licenses-69273/) is scanned, is a distinct probability. It's already common knowledge that both DHS and Canadian Border agents use search engines like Google to research persons entering and exiting the countries and attach what they've discovered to the person's profile (Look up "Andrew Feldmar") for life.
We've already eradicated Habeas Corpus in this country and seriously blurred the lines with regards to unwarranted searches based on suspicion alone or no suspicion at all. The very crux of the DHS act, in fact was based upon the processing, gathering, mantenance and cross-pollination of data between Enforcement Agencies and in one central place (DHS itself). Everybody bitched and whined that 9/11 would never have happened if the CIA and the FBI were able to cross-pollinate files on citizens ("You mean all the data we needed to stop the terrorists was out there and you did nothing simply because of a few Constitutional rights?!? This is a travesty!). Now we have a nasty precedent of "leave no stone unturned" built into the very core of Defense in this country so in essence, by pure virtue of the very purpose of the DHS, associating the your LJ with your ID with your passport, etc must occur...because We The People demanded it back in 2001.
Discussing the concept of a 'facebook card' just seems to make that woyld be doable. Tie in paypal or new thing exactly like paypal couls be a potential long term strategy. Big money in koans and payday lending. Who better to collect than your friends. You also keep telling them were you go and are.
This disturbs and appeals to me. Someone fund that. You'll probably make scary money.
I meant loans. Getting the starving to pay for koans instead of food is magnificent bastard level of evil. Do that instead.
QuoteIt's already common knowledge that both DHS and Canadian Border agents use search engines like Google to research persons entering and exiting the countries and attach what they've discovered to the person's profile (Look up "Andrew Feldmar") for life.
PD has a similar immigration policy.
Quote from: Cain on March 10, 2012, 01:07:39 AM
QuoteIt's already common knowledge that both DHS and Canadian Border agents use search engines like Google to research persons entering and exiting the countries and attach what they've discovered to the person's profile (Look up "Andrew Feldmar") for life.
PD has a similar immigration policy.
:lulz:
Quote from: navkat on March 08, 2012, 08:07:09 PM
I assumed ECH meant that they have a master account that isn't restricted by blocks, friending or privacy controls.
that is what I meant, though it amounts to the same thing. They can see ANYTHING on your facebook page, regardless of your privacy settings. My buddy in Maine is a Waldo County Deputy Sheriff and they use it for everything from figuring out where the underage parties are to catching people setting up the fencing of stolen goods.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on March 10, 2012, 03:08:51 AM
Quote from: navkat on March 08, 2012, 08:07:09 PM
I assumed ECH meant that they have a master account that isn't restricted by blocks, friending or privacy controls.
that is what I meant, though it amounts to the same thing. They can see ANYTHING on your facebook page, regardless of your privacy settings. My buddy in Maine is a Waldo County Deputy Sheriff and they use it for everything from figuring out where the underage parties are to catching people setting up the fencing of stolen goods.
I see ...
And are your Internet cables also on poles above the ground? (how does that work anyway, when everybody could walk up to a telefone pole and tap it, no?)
I bet it's not restricted to a whitelisted IP ... they probably do monitor access, but if some Anonymous would catch it, spider/download as much info possible from a pre-selected list of famous/interesting accounts ... especially from the more vocal "if you got nothing to hide" politicians.
just to press the point about it's not the privacy settings but the
existence of all that data in a centralized location controlled by a single entity.
Then that would be very irresponsible, unethical and in bad taste.
Quote from: Triple Zero on March 10, 2012, 09:25:29 AM
Then that would be very irresponsible, unethical and in bad taste.
You mean like it normally is over here? :?