California Bans Social Snooping
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
A law was required for this. Apparently, when it's on the Net, society's laws need not apply, unless they affect the (imagined) profit of transnational corporations or the (swollen) pride of governments. When it's people's privacy and rights, the action comes somewhat belated.
I can't believe this had room to become a 'deeply disturbing practice of employers' sports teams and some schools until a law was passed. If anybody demanded my account details or that I add them as a friend so that they could monitor me, I'd tell them to stick their keyboards up their arse. I'd give it the final kick. I can't believe people submitted.
I can't believe this had room to become a 'deeply disturbing practice of employers' sports teams and some schools until a law was passed. If anybody demanded my account details or that I add them as a friend so that they could monitor me, I'd tell them to stick their keyboards up their arse. I'd give it the final kick. I can't believe people submitted.
Wow. My state enacted a law that isn't a complete embarrassment that incurs the ire and mockery of the rest of the nation? And it protects the privacy of citizens? And frikkin' Moonbeam actually signed this thing? What the hell happened? Have benevolent aliens used a mind control beam on our asshole legislators? Did I fall through a dimensional rift, and am now in Bizarro-California? Has the apocalypse drawn nigh and I must repent my sins? (If this is the case, I'm in deep shit.) Have the stars finally aligned and the Great Old Ones will soon arise from their slumber? This is just weird, but at least weird=good this time.
I've never played Fallout but I have (ugh, unfortunately) lived here most of my life. Trust me on this one.
Oh-ho-ho, somebody's trying to save their political career. Now this makes a teensy-weensy more sense. Well, it's out of my hands, the asswipe isn't from my district, but at least no prospective employers will be looking at my Facebook page. Not that anyone does anyway.Andy Chalk said:
*sigh* I think someone already mentioned this but no, that's the real flag of the State of California. [http://www.50states.com/flag/caflag.htm#.UGZ8bFGk-Sp]Scarecrow said:
I've never played Fallout but I have (ugh, unfortunately) lived here most of my life. Trust me on this one.
Thanks for being less lazy than I and getting the image.Ed130 said:He is talking about the image on the main page news link, not the article page.TheMann said:
Captcha: I am captcha!
Yes...yes you are.
Don't worry about it. I bet the NCR doesn't have leaders as good as this guy.TheMann said:
No-one acts with the utmost integrity at all times, and employers seem to live a fantasy world where they can expect that to be the case. The more access employers have to your social life, the easier it is for them to fire you. It's bad enough when they have to hear about it through other sources, it's still none of their business and still shouldn't be firing material, but it is.
Not to mention that you are in fact not allowed by Facebook to divulge your password in the terms of use, or that many people use one or a few passwords for many things. But at least if it's just 'friending', you can put them on the restricted list and they'll never see anything they shouldn't. ^^
Not to mention that you are in fact not allowed by Facebook to divulge your password in the terms of use, or that many people use one or a few passwords for many things. But at least if it's just 'friending', you can put them on the restricted list and they'll never see anything they shouldn't. ^^
Until they demand to be on the unrestricted list because you're hiding something which means that they'll call you in to an unofficial meeting and heavily imply but not explicitly say that you're fired unless they can see all your shenanigans.MeChaNiZ3D said:
I find it disturbing that they needed a law for this in the first place. Your social media profile is your personal thing. Because of that it should be protected by The Constitution!
Wait wait wait...California (and Leeland Yee in particular) actually did something good for once?!
I am in shock. I mean, I want to say good on the man, but after Brown vs EMA, I don't know if I can. (Yes, I know we won, but still)
I am in shock. I mean, I want to say good on the man, but after Brown vs EMA, I don't know if I can. (Yes, I know we won, but still)
Wouldn't people just say they don't have/use social media and if they still demand you give them an account name and password, just set up a second account under the same name and with a completely new password. Let them have that instead if they want to monitor an empty, contact-less page with your name on it.
Out-loophole the loophole people.
Out-loophole the loophole people.
Now maybe he learned something during the debate over his earlier efforts and that's why he's making better choices now. Or maybe his two headed coin just came up on the un-scarred side this time.Andy Chalk said:
48, Alaska and Hawaii are the other two.Zachary Amaranth said:
OT: I do wish we had a "Right to Privacy Amendment" added to the constitution, instead of just relying on a combination of some of the other parts of the texts to give us a phesudo right.
