安全与隐私pluralistic.net
职场监控正向你袭来
Workplace surveillance is coming for you
2022 — 2024，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是 Cory Doctorow 的一篇文章，讨论雇主用来监控员工工作的「bossware」（老板软件）如何以效率为名侵害员工权益，并把它与泰勒制科学管理的历史幽灵联系起来。文章以某监控软件创始人为例，指出技术开发者常分不清「自己使用技术」和「技术被用来对付自己」，并呼吁以团结（工会）作为对抗手段。
为什么经久不衰：远程办公和精细化管理让 bossware 不断扩散，这篇对技术伦理、劳资权力和量化管理的批判在今天依然切中要害。
HN 评论精选
对 bossware 深恶痛绝，认为它会加速糟糕职场的衰败；呼吁工人组建工会，反对主动参与压迫他人的工作。
天哪，我以前因为这样那样的原因不喜欢 Doctorow，但现在我要彻底改变看法了。我觉得这篇文章很棒。我确信「bossware」会加速本就糟糕的工作场所的衰败。很高兴听说亚马逊正在弃用它，也强烈希望他们的工人照样能组建工会。什么样的雇主会在员工上厕所的时间上斤斤计较？肯定不是什么好雇主。我以前在 LinkedIn 上看到过 Crossover for Work 的招聘，一个薪资承诺（$400/yr，疑为 $400k 之误）让我很感兴趣，还好没去那里工作。我不会去主动压迫本已受压迫的工人。去他的 bossware 和那些主动压迫别人的人。
avg_dev查看英文原文
Damn, I had some fairly old opinion of Doctorow where I disliked him for some reason or other, but I am definitely revising that. I thought this was a great article. I am certain “bossware” will accelerate the downfall of already shitty workplaces. Very happy to hear Amazon is doing away with it. Strongly hope their workers unionize anyway. What kind of employer nickle-and-dimes a worker’s bathroom breaks? Not a good one, that’s for damn sure. I used to see these job postings on LinkedIn for Crossover for Work. I was intrigued by the claim of $400yr salary. Glad I didn’t end up working there. Thanks but no thanks, I am not going to work actively oppressing already downtrodden workers. A quick search turned up this fascinating article as well: https://medium.com/@whistler_12777/heres-why-crossover-is-a-scam-78f2e867b3a0 Fuck bossware. Fuck people who work to actively oppress others. Humanity for all, value of life for each and every person out there. Rant over. Thanks for the link.
行业分不清「使用技术」和「技术被用来对付自己」，工作场所监控技术必然被用来伤害工人，从业者在道德上难辞其咎。
关于工作场所监控／「bossware」：文章指出，Mazzoli 似乎要么没用过自己的产品，要么是在自己掌控产品的条件下使用——像运动员用秒表给自己计时，而不是像老板那样用它来决定是否扣工资或解雇人。这种无法理解「使用技术」与「技术被用来对付你」之间区别的问题，是整个行业的通病。我认为这是「技术本身无好坏」阵营的关键理解失败：正如死星显然永远不会被用来开采小行星，工作场所监控技术会被用来伤害工人也很明显，至少从它目前的使用方式就能看出来。仅仅因为理论上可以用于非邪恶目的就继续做这种技术，在道德上是破产的。
skyfaller查看英文原文
On workplace surveillance / "bossware": > Mazzoli seems to have either not used his product, or, if he did, did so under conditions where he was in charge of it – using it the way an athlete might use a stopwatch to time their own sprints, and not the way a boss might: to decide whether to dock your pay or fire you. > This inability to understand the difference between using a technology and having the same technology used against you is endemic to the industry. I think this is a key failure of understanding for the "tech is neither good nor bad!" camp: just as the Death Star clearly was never going to be used for mining planetoids, it's very clear how workplace surveillance tech will be used to harm workers, if nothing else because of how it is currently being used. Continuing to work on such tech just because it could theoretically be used for non-evil purposes is morally bankrupt, and something the industry needs to establish ethical standards to prevent.
做 bossware 的人是逐步陷入的，买家并不真正了解产品；除了工会，还需要其他可供选择的替代方案，让员工有处可去。
我最近看了电影《巴西》，它的反乌托邦视角令人不寒而栗，因为你很容易把自己看成机器的一部分，尽力只是努力生存。同样，我能理解做这类软件的人怎么一步步陷进去——居家办公时发现了市场需求，做了受欢迎的原型并不断迭代。很多人真心对时间追踪和优化感兴趣，但个人工具市场很小，很多雇主愿意付钱，因为他们想要更高效的员工。购买这些工具的人其实并不真正知道自己买的是什么，他们想相信自己找到了解决员工假装工作问题的方案。而暴露在监控下的员工没有权力改变它。解决方案是什么？Doctorow 提到工会，我同意。但我认为还需要另一个可以加入、不会毁掉你的阵营，来与这个庞然大物竞争。能够辞职找到别的工作，只有当别的工作在是否使用这类监控上存在明显差异时才有效。
mattnewton查看英文原文
I’ve recently watched Brazil, and the film has one of the most chilling dystopian views I’ve ever seen because it’s easy to see yourself as part of the machine doing your best just trying to get by. Similarly, I can see how the people working in this software slipped into this- they identified a need in the market with WFH, tried prototypes that were well received on the market, and keep iterating. Many of them legitimately are interested in time tracking and optimization, but of course the market for personal tools like that is very small and lots of employers want to pay you for this because they want more productive employees. Meanwhile the people buying them don’t really know what they are buying, they want to believe they have found a solution to the problem they are terrified of, employees pretending to work and milking them. And the employees exposed to it aren’t in a position of power to change it. And next thing you know we have a dystopian monster with enough funding to be responsible for people’s jobs itself, where no one individual has incentives to buck the curve or much ability to fight back. What’s the solution then? Doctorow mentions unions, and I’d agree that could work. I think there must be another faction to join that doesn’t ruin you, something to compete with the monolith in case the monolith gets sick in this way. Being able to quit and find somewhere else only works if that somewhere else is mostly differentiated by the fact that it doesn’t do these programs you disagree with- many people will put up with this and worse if there is a large pay differential between it and the next option, or if they would have to move and uproot themselves. And if a government gets sick in this way it might not let you quit the country. You have to be able to form collective groups that can bargain with the behemoth, like a union, or political party, or other action that relies on people for it’s power and not capital. That’s one reason why money in politics is so worrying to me, because the way I see it, it messes with this crucial release valve of political action.
过度量化无关指标会阻碍真正的进步；管理者把「花时间」直接等同于「贡献」，这种线性假设是有害的。
我正在读《指标的暴政》，它分析了过度测量与真正目标无关的东西如何常常阻碍真正的进步。管理者想知道工人对公司成功的贡献，但他们测量的是工人做 X 花了多少时间，完全忽略了「做 X 的时间如何贡献公司成功」这个中间步骤，通常把它当作线性方程。过度测量往往比完全不测量更糟。
bheadmaster查看英文原文
I'm currently reading "The Tyranny of Metrics" which provides a decent analysis of how over-measuring things that don't have anything to do with the real goal often serves as a deterrent to real progress. What managers want to know is how much do their workers contribute to the success of the company. What they measure is how much time do workers spend doing X. They're completely glossing over the middle step of how does the time spent doing X contribute to the success of the company, which is usually taken as some kind of linear equation. Over-measurement is often worse than not measuring anything at all.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
非法素数
Illegal prime
维基百科条目，介绍“非法素数”：某些素数之所以被称为“非法”，是因为它们经特定编码后，恰好对应一段被法律禁止传播的数据——最著名的是 DVD 解密程序 DeCSS 的代码，有人把…
安全与隐私上首页 5 次 · 2010–2021en.wikipedia.org编辑精选关于 /dev/urandom 的常见误区
Myths about /dev/urandom
（Thomas Hühn 撰写，2014 年首发并持续更新）逐条反驳关于 /dev/urandom 的常见误解：它与 /dev/random 使用的是同一个 CSPRNG，一旦完…
安全与隐私上首页 5 次 · 2014–20202uo.de编辑精选AES 高级加密标准火柴人图解
A Stick Figure Guide to the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
一篇用火柴人漫画形式讲解 AES（高级加密标准）算法的经典科普文章。
安全与隐私上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022moserware.com编辑精选指纹是用户名，不是密码
Fingerprints are Usernames, not Passwords
作者（eCryptfs 维护者、Ubuntu 安全工程师）认为指纹等生物特征是公开、不可更改的标识，应视作用户名而非密码，不能当作秘密凭据用于认证。
安全与隐私上首页 4 次 · 2013–2017blog.dustinkirkland.comHTTPS 连接的最初几毫秒（2009）
The First Few Milliseconds of an HTTPS Connection (2009)
逐毫秒拆解一次 HTTPS 连接建立时发生了什么，重点讲 TLS 握手、证书验证、RSA 签名与密钥协商等机制，面向不熟悉该领域的读者。
安全与隐私上首页 4 次 · 2009–2020moserware.com编辑精选