Coronavirus Concerns: More People Working from Home Means More Employer Tracking

So I’m going to stir up some :poop: , y’all — but bare with me.

Generally speaking, I’m of two minds on this subject. On one hand, I’m OK with this.

e.g., prior to CommieVirus2020, we would go to work, log on to an employer-provided asset, and commence working. On Employer-provided assets, such as laptops, desktops, servers, etc, I’m 100% fine with <pick an employer> installing NARCwarez. Why? Simple: They own the device.

However, that’s not what’s been happening.

Instead, as more and more people are working from home, employers are attempting to basically “track,” your every waking moment, from the time you roll out of bed, to the time you crawl back into it. Yea, I know that’s an extreme, but let’s get real — we’re talking about a really bad fucking episode of Black Mirror.

So you’ve got two choices: You can tell your employer to pound sand; that you won’t tolerate this type of invasion of privacy.

Their response will probably be your atypical “…..install this (or else you can’t work here any longer).”

So what do you do? Continue reading


Should Uber Drivers be Fingerprinted in Background Checks?

I’ve heard a LOT of talk recently about Uber and Lyft’s pending exit from the Austin, TX marketplace, and I can’t say that I blame them. On one hand — Government “regulation,” only stifles competition… but on the other, when one realizes that just about -anybody- can become a driver for either of these companies so long as they have a 2005+ model vehicle, the idea of fingerprinting potential drivers (IMO) does not seem too far fetched.

Allow me to explain:

When you go to work for Yellow cab, for example, you become a licensed; bonded driver. In short, Yellow Cab knows exactly who you are, where you’ve lived, as well as have access to your (criminal) background information (which INCLUDES your Fingerprints). To me it’s a safety issue — as a passenger, I would think that knowing your driver is a rational; sane, functional member of society would be quite settling as it alleviates the “what if’s,” associated with climbing into a stranger’s car.

Sadly, responsibility has never actually been part of Uber or Lyft’s business plan. They would much rather you [sic, the driver] assume any and all liability wherein they [sic, the Company] are held in no way responsible for their utter & complete disregard for proper working conditions, accommodations, etc. As far as I’m concerned, their whole entire platform is digital ; it’s not like they really require brick & mortar office buildings, etc. in order to conduct their daily routines —- it’s not too much to ask for them [sic, the Company] to properly vet the individuals representing them, else they risk hiring the Zodiac Killer.
Austin, TX for the win..

More: Uber, Lyft set to leave Texas city over fingerprinting rule –


Dear Netflix:

Dear Netflix,

We here at Social Hacking are writing you in hopes that we may sway your decision to overtly screw over tens of thousands (conservative estimate) of subscribers to your services.

$1.99 might not seem like a lot of money to most people, but to a computer analyst who stares at numbers and multiplies by the thousands daily, it’s quite easy to estimate the amount of money netted on a simple increase of such a minute pittance. The issue, however, is the demographic attracted to your service: ‪#‎Millennials.

I can’t speak for -all- Millennials, but I can say that there is an overly large body of us who have been extremely financially affected by the 2007-2008‪ ‎recession, combined with the fact that employers now more than ever misunderstand the concept of fair, livable wages, all mix together to form one anxious pile of 💩 that we deftly handle as best we can. Netflix is our solace.

The reality is, the cheaper your service, the less inclined people are to bootleg or pirate content. You are connected to the internet, after all. It’s not like you are the -only- game in town for media…’s just that you give us nice graphics and imagery of the movie box covers….

We implore you to consider leaving your subscription pricing as it is — learn from Hulu’s mistake. When they began, Hulu had -all- content; it was free, no subscription required. Then came the ads. site was still free….just had to watch or deal with a popup or two. Then came Hulu+. No ads, but it cost ya $7.99/month.

fine. no ads. totally worth.

then……THEN came the ads. ON Hulu+.

‘cuz content. and reasons.

…and then came the exodus. I don’t know too many people that utilize Hulu+ for their content much anymore. I’m not saying they’re not out there, I’m simply saying that in my (direct) social circle, nobody I know uses Hulu+. They -all- utilize your Netflix, or Sling, or Kodi, or Project Free TV, and so on…..

I ❤ your service, as do a great many of our subscribers to be sure. It would be terrible to see your profit margins unusually affected should you decide to proceed.

Oh, and for anybody who’s gotten through this TL;DR, here’s some maths for ya —>

$1.99/ea x 50k = $99,500

$1.99/ea x 100k = $199,000

$1.99/ea x 500k = $995,000

$1.99/ea x 1M = $1,990,000

^ the point I’m attempting to make with these numbers, folks, is the fact that we haven’t really exceeded the population (estimates) of some of the very cities in which we reside.

e.g., think about how many people use Netflix. Even if it’s a scattered 100k ppl here or there, it’s still adding to the amount of money chipped away at this plan of action. We protest 😛