Job Applicants Asked for Facebook Passwords

[BabyRaptor]

So I'm a pedophile because I expect to have some privacy?

Fuck that guy. That's the most polite thing I have for him.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Many people lock their information so that only friends can view them, and they want to look into your private messages to make sure that you aren't participating in any illegal...whatevers.

I can think of many reasons why transparency is a good thing. (The primary reason being that it would save lives).

Anyone care to put forth an argument that's pro-privacy? And no, 'Privacy is a human right' is not a good argument. You have to explain why it's worth letting people die over.

1: How would letting your employer look at what you are talking about with your friends save lives? I can see if this was a police investigation or something, but this isn't. It is an employer looking into someone's personal info.

2: Making everything transparent would make people die too. Remember the Arab Spring, and how everything was coordinated with social media? What if someone in a gang wants to provide valuable information to the police, either anonymously or privately, to avoid being killed by the gang? To steal your own words, explain why transparency is worth letting people die over.

3: Privacy exists for a reason: too keep things private. What if I want to not let my potentially embarrassing purchasing decision be displayed on the internet for all to see? What if I want to hide what my Christmas shopping from my family?

1. I was referring to privacy in general, not the specific case of a potential employer looking through your private messages on Facebook. They're related, though. It's not that looking through one person's information will save lives. Well, it could depending on who is being looked at, but not everyone is going to be planning a murder/rape/whatever. There are people who are planning those things, though.

2. Not the same. I don't actually know anything about 'Arab Spring', but like the gang example...it's not like a government agency is going to go 'Wow, this guy is giving us vital information. Let's post his information so that he can get hunted down.' Something like the witness protection program isn't going to go put that information out there, either. Basically, government can keep their privacy to an extent. (Something like the dealings of Senators and such shouldn't be kept private, but where the US stores their nukes should be.)

Edit: Transparency in regards to law enforcement, though. This isn't 'The whole world should know what you're doing 24/7'.

3. It'll help you make better decisions, no? If you're ashamed to do something, don't do it.

 

[Togs]

Er...how does the word iconoclast fit into this situation? There is no religious...anything being discussed.

Anywho, it would help stop things like this for one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019409/Joshua-Davies-16-dared-Facebook-friends-murder-Rebecca-Aylward.html

Many of the groups taking part in the London Riots used social networking sites to plan where to go smash up next. Not sure on the deaths/injuries/monetary damage caused on that one, but I imagine monetary damage was pretty large, if nothing else.

Copy pasted direct from dictionary.com-

iconoclast
[ahy-kon-uh-klast]   Origin
i·con·o·clast
   [ahy-kon-uh-klast]
noun
1.
a person who attacks cherished beliefs, traditional institutions, etc., as being based on error or superstition.
2.
a breaker or destroyer of images, especially those set up for religious veneration.

In this instance said cherished belief or traditional institution being the inalienable human right to privacy.

The possibility of misuse does not justify that level of oversight- such behaviours are regretable but unfortunately part of human nature.

That level of social control is the same twaddle peddled by the Neocons and ultimately one of the basic tenets of Nazism- that may sound hyperbolic but I can think of no better way of phrasing it.

And if you believe me wrong, why not post your social netowrking details on here? Or perhaps the details for your email account? Or how about your bank account? Gotta make sure your not buying pornography or the ingredients for a fertiliser bomb right?

 

[thenumberthirteen]

This seems a bit odd. I can't really see much use in asking this question. Maybe giving them read access, but account passwords seems sort of useless unless they want to change something.

If I were an applicant I'd give them my username and password that I use to pay my garbage collector's bill online.

Though wouldn't that have your payment details on it? I'd rather let them have my Twitter Account then my Paypal.

Thus, the police force is asking for a person to break the terms of a previously agreed to contract. This is illegal to do, and as such cannot be used to discriminate against the person during the hiring process if they refuse to do so

I don't think EULAs are legally binding so itmay not be Illegal. Facebook could, however, ban your account for doing this.

 

[Aidinthel]

I suppose they also expect applicants to let them go through their mail and their bank statement too.

 

[Viral_Lola]

No... no... no... Seeing my facebook is one thing but wanting the password to it is another. Sorry but no.

 

[Iron Mal]

Consider it part of the background check. What you do in private reveals more about you as a person than anything you do in public.

Which would be fine if it were part of a police investigation (they need to look at things like that to do their job) but for a job application that's going a bit overboard, all a potential employer really needs to know is have you been convicted of any crimes before and if so, what crimes?

How does going through all the 'I love you' notes I left to my girlfriend over Facebook do that exactly?

What makes privacy a human right? Who decided that? What purpose does privacy serve? What benefits are there to privacy?

Imagine if nothing in your life ever was private, imagine if everything you ever did, said, thought or felt was open to be viewed and examined by all.

Now imagine if your address, phone number, family, friend's and loved one's contact details and locations were avaliable to everyone at any time for any reason.

What if all of that information made it's way into the hands of someone who meant you or them harm? (given how there'd be no privacy there'd be nothing to prevent that)

There is a really damn good reason that everyone is entitled to their own privacy (namely, not everything we do needs to be public or should be public, in fact, making it all public could actually endanger more lives than it actually saves).

As I said, 'It's a human right, end all' is a piss poor argument.

Human rights are fundamental and vital things that are considered to be worth upholding regardless of context or situation.

Something being a human right is actually a very strong arguement, regardless of how trivial you believe it to be, so unless there's a damn good reason otherwise it's a good enough reason on it's own to not do something.

We here in the west are lucky to never have to worry about most of our human rights being violated so if I were you I'd take a moment to stop and reflect on just how fortuneate you are that we collectively give a damn about your physical, mental and emotional well being.

Edit: Nothing is self-explanatory. 'Just because' is an even worse argument than 'It's a human right, end all' is.

'Just because' is a worse arguement, but that's not the arguement being made here.

The topic at hand is a gross violation of privacy with no decent justification behind it.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Er...how does the word iconoclast fit into this situation? There is no religious...anything being discussed.

Anywho, it would help stop things like this for one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019409/Joshua-Davies-16-dared-Facebook-friends-murder-Rebecca-Aylward.html

Many of the groups taking part in the London Riots used social networking sites to plan where to go smash up next. Not sure on the deaths/injuries/monetary damage caused on that one, but I imagine monetary damage was pretty large, if nothing else.

Copy pasted direct from dictionary.com-

iconoclast
[ahy-kon-uh-klast]   Origin
i·con·o·clast
   [ahy-kon-uh-klast]
noun
1.
a person who attacks cherished beliefs, traditional institutions, etc., as being based on error or superstition.
2.
a breaker or destroyer of images, especially those set up for religious veneration.

In this instance said cherished belief or traditional institution being the inalienable human right to privacy.

The possibility of misuse does not justify that level of oversight- such behaviours are regretable but unfortunately part of human nature.

That level of social control is the same twaddle peddled by the Neocons and ultimately one of the basic tenets of Nazism- that may sound hyperbolic but I can think of no better way of phrasing it.

And if you believe me wrong, why not post your social netowrking details on here? Or perhaps the details for your email account? Or how about your bank account? Gotta make sure your not buying pornography or the ingredients for a fertiliser bomb right?

What possibility of misuse is there? Serious question. It's not falsifying information...it's just what you've done.

Godwin's Law!

Yeah, I get that a lot. Thing is, this isn't 'Everyone in the whole world should know what you're doing all the time'. This is, law enforcement should have more access to 'private' information in order to better...well...enforce the law. So yes, it would be important for law enforcement to know if I'm trying to make a fertilizer bomb, but not wholly important for the world to know.

Edit: Still have yet to explain why privacy is an 'inalienable human right', though. And no, it does not go without saying. Nothing goes without saying.

 

[naam]

Presumably this is part of an intelligence test for the job?
I know I wouldn't hire/trust someone who'd give out passwords like that

 

[AKmontalvo]

well if your going to work for the police they are gong to do backround checks, psych tests, and whatnot, that being the case the circumstances may make this make sense

 

[BreakfastMan]

2. Not the same. I don't actually know anything about 'Arab Spring', but like the gang example...it's not like a government agency is going to go 'Wow, this guy is giving us vital information. Let's post his information so that he can get hunted down.' Something like the witness protection program isn't going to go put that information out there, either. Basically, government can keep their privacy to an extend. (Something like the dealings of Senators and such shouldn't be kept private, but where the US stores their nukes should be.)

The "Arab Spring" example was referring to the string of protest against governments in the middle east earlier this, many of which were coordinated through social networking sites.

The gang member/whistle blower has to contact the police force/FBI/Justice department first. If he tried to do that over the phone or through e-mail in a world where privacy is non-existent, well... I suspect you can put two and two together and get one dead snitch (and possibly many more dead because that gang/company couldn't be brought to justice).

3. It'll help you make better decisions, no? If you're ashamed to do something, don't do it.

That is not the point. I enjoy Ouran High Host Club (a shojo/girly anime), and I am not afraid to admit that to the right people. If one of my more... manly friends could see that I purchased the box-set of the series from Amazon, I would not hear the end of it. I honestly want to avoid that. Does my purchasing something I like, for the reason of enjoying in the privacy of my own home really need to be seen on the internet? And you didn't provide a rebuttal to my "Christmas shopping" example.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Consider it part of the background check. What you do in private reveals more about you as a person than anything you do in public.

Which would be fine if it were part of a police investigation (they need to look at things like that to do their job) but for a job application that's going a bit overboard, all a potential employer really needs to know is have you been convicted of any crimes before and if so, what crimes?

How does going through all the 'I love you' notes I left to my girlfriend over Facebook do that exactly?

What makes privacy a human right? Who decided that? What purpose does privacy serve? What benefits are there to privacy?

Imagine if nothing in your life ever was private, imagine if everything you ever did, said, thought or felt was open to be viewed and examined by all.

Now imagine if your address, phone number, family, friend's and loved one's contact details and locations were avaliable to everyone at any time for any reason.

What if all of that information made it's way into the hands of someone who meant you or them harm? (given how there'd be no privacy there'd be nothing to prevent that)

There is a really damn good reason that everyone is entitled to their own privacy (namely, not everything we do needs to be public or should be public, in fact, making it all public could actually endanger more lives than it actually saves).

As I said, 'It's a human right, end all' is a piss poor argument.

Human rights are fundamental and vital things that are considered to be worth upholding regardless of context or situation.

Something being a human right is actually a very strong arguement, regardless of how trivial you believe it to be, so unless there's a damn good reason otherwise it's a good enough reason on it's own to not do something.

We here in the west are lucky to never have to worry about most of our human rights being violated so if I were you I'd take a moment to stop and reflect on just how fortuneate you are that we collectively give a damn about your physical, mental and emotional well being.

Edit: Nothing is self-explanatory. 'Just because' is an even worse argument than 'It's a human right, end all' is.

'Just because' is a worse arguement, but that's not the arguement being made here.

The topic at hand is a gross violation of privacy with no decent justification behind it.

1. They also need to know if there is a chance you'll commit a crime in the future. Specifically a violent crime. Like that Doctor in the military who went crazy and started shooting everyone. Also, they'll redoubtably use it to 'keep tabs' on the employee. If you post something like 'Yeah, I let off the hook this time. I shouldn't have, but hey, he gave me $50.', then yeah, it's kind of their business to know that.

As for the whole 'I love you' notes...that's assuming that anyone cares. Yeah, okay, it's nice, and you and your girlfriend care, but do anyone else actually care? The Police aren't going to be searching through your messages looking for your Great-Grandmother's recipe for Apple Pie.

2. I imagine it would feel like I'm a celebrity and/or politician. But again, I'm not saying the whole world needs to know, just law enforcement.

3. FFFFFF. What makes it a human right? I keep asking this, but nobody is answering it. What makes something a human right? Why is that important? Who decides what is a human right?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

< "Privacy is for pedos," he said. "Fundamentally, no one else needs it."

Damn, that was my thoughts as well.

That guy should hang for what he said.

Especially as there's a number of other sites where Police Officers freely discuss work.

But given Occupy at the moment, are we at all surprised what the Police are demanding from new recruits now?

 

[Imper1um]

When in doubt, use the following:

FB Account "ThisQuestion IsIrrelevant"
Username "[email protected]"
Password "JeezYouAreParanoid"

(No, it doesn't work, its fake)

 

[evilneko]

I wouldn't turn over the passwords to anything of mine, especially to the police. I direct them to the fourth amendment of the United States Constitution.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

They're crazy asking for such personal details. Then again, employers sometimes do such things. I had one vacation job employer, a cleaning company, demand I hand in a copy of a bank pay card. I didn't have any at the time, and wasn't planning on getting one just for them. I downplayed the issue and was hired.

They nagged me that I should get one for them anyway, and explained they needed it to ensure the bank number I provided was correct and they weren't paying someone else. Hang on, that's my responsibility. If I provide a wrong number, I have to go get the money back, not the employer.

In the end they refused to pay me for months of work and I had to threaten to take them to court over it. They paid so much later than agreed that I got a 50% bonus over the entire amount.

The big problem? They promoted one of their cleaners to foreman, and then from foreman to manager, so you have in fact got a dumb idiot with no training running an entire branch of the business. Notices of legality and being reasonable just never occur to that kind of manager.

So it's the police department that have done this? The applicants that refuse haven't really got too much choice then

Well, it's easy to get around. Either shut down your facebook in advance, or deny having one and then run to shut it down, get hired, and then put it back up.

Or give them a false password and say you "remembered it wrong".

I would chalk this up to stupidity rather than malice. There was a government website (from Ohio, I think) that had "operating hours" because the dumb shits turned the server off when they left.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Many people lock their information so that only friends can view them, and they want to look into your private messages to make sure that you aren't participating in any illegal...whatevers.

I can think of many reasons why transparency is a good thing. (The primary reason being that it would save lives).

Anyone care to put forth an argument that's pro-privacy? And no, 'Privacy is a human right' is not a good argument. You have to explain why it's worth letting people die over.

So let me get this straight, the reason they want to have access to my account would be so they can scroll through my private messages to make sure I'm not an axe-murderer/peadophile/drug dealer/anti-christ?

Isn't that what a police background check is for?

Privacy is a human right, human rights being violated is a pretty damn good arguement to not do something (just as it would be a self-explanitory reason not to do a lot of things).

This isn't like checking to see if someone is carrying a knife or a firearm on them, this is poking through people's private messages (most of which I can guarantee you are just idle chatter between friends and family) you aren't saving lives with this (nice try at overdramatising it though) you're just being nosey.

But let me humour you, let's say that the fact that violating a human right isn't enough on it's own and that there are no good pro-privacy arguements, how exactly does this save lives and make it worth the breach of human rights?

Consider it part of the background check. What you do in private reveals more about you as a person than anything you do in public.

What makes privacy a human right? Who decided that? What purpose does privacy serve? What benefits are there to privacy?

As I said, 'It's a human right, end all' is a piss poor argument.

Edit: Nothing is self-explanatory. 'Just because' is an even worse argument than 'It's a human right, end all' is.

You'd probably quite enjoy a dictatorship. Your problem being this is a democracy.... well. A lax Oligarchy.

Point being, we have our privacy and taking it away is tantamount to taking away freedom. If you remove someone's right to privacy you essentially remove their right to be themselves.

There are plenty of perfectly legal things that I talk to my friends about on FB that I wouldn't want people I don't know spooling through at their leisure. What someone does in the privacy of their own home is their own damn business, providing it's between consensual adults. The privacy of their own social network is exactly the same.

And you're naive if you think that giving potential bosses the power to demand access to your private networks etc wouldn't be abused. It gives them a chance to discriminate against you from learning details they otherwise wouldn't have known. Even if they're not illegal or they don't violate company policies. What's to stop a boss from firing someone because own something the boss considers unsavoury.

Look at that MP, Ron Davies. After it was discovered he had sex with another man. Apparently his sex life was enough to have him fired when it came to light. And that's not an isolated case. There was a Lib Dem MP that had his story leaked to a tabloid about his fetishes. Apparently him being into bondage or whatever was enough to have him fired too. People have a right to privacy. If you honestly think we could exist in a world without the millions of little lies we tell and secrets we keep, you're a fool. We judge each other over the smallest things, and everyone has their secrets that they don't want to shed light on and receive that judgement.

Not to mention there are tons of ways this could be abused and theirs no room in our society for any kind of argument about taking away peoples freedoms. Even if it's only the freedom to ***** about your boss on FB to your friends.

It's a democratic republic (Provided we're talking about the US). Big difference. Also, dictatorships can be extremely beneficial, provided the dictator in question doesn't become power hungry and/or corrupt. And yes, there have been beneficial dictatorships. There have also been malicious dictatorships. To simplify it...Dictatorships are generally extremes. They're either very, very good or very, very bad. Because of the system of checks and balances, a democratic republic is either 'meh' good or 'meh' bad.

Not sure why people keep taking what I said as 'EVERYONE MUST KNOW WHAT EVERYONE IS DOING 24/7'. I'm just talking law enforcement. But isn't it kind of sad that you don't think humans can function as a society without deception and lies? It could very well be the other way around. There are so many secrets and lies floating about that people will jump on any tidbit of perceived truth.

 

[Knivestgn]

Consider it part of the background check. What you do in private reveals more about you as a person than anything you do in public.

Which would be fine if it were part of a police investigation (they need to look at things like that to do their job) but for a job application that's going a bit overboard, all a potential employer really needs to know is have you been convicted of any crimes before and if so, what crimes?

How does going through all the 'I love you' notes I left to my girlfriend over Facebook do that exactly?

What makes privacy a human right? Who decided that? What purpose does privacy serve? What benefits are there to privacy?

Imagine if nothing in your life ever was private, imagine if everything you ever did, said, thought or felt was open to be viewed and examined by all.

Now imagine if your address, phone number, family, friend's and loved one's contact details and locations were avaliable to everyone at any time for any reason.

What if all of that information made it's way into the hands of someone who meant you or them harm? (given how there'd be no privacy there'd be nothing to prevent that)

There is a really damn good reason that everyone is entitled to their own privacy (namely, not everything we do needs to be public or should be public, in fact, making it all public could actually endanger more lives than it actually saves).

As I said, 'It's a human right, end all' is a piss poor argument.

Human rights are fundamental and vital things that are considered to be worth upholding regardless of context or situation.

Something being a human right is actually a very strong arguement, regardless of how trivial you believe it to be, so unless there's a damn good reason otherwise it's a good enough reason on it's own to not do something.

We here in the west are lucky to never have to worry about most of our human rights being violated so if I were you I'd take a moment to stop and reflect on just how fortuneate you are that we collectively give a damn about your physical, mental and emotional well being.

Edit: Nothing is self-explanatory. 'Just because' is an even worse argument than 'It's a human right, end all' is.

'Just because' is a worse arguement, but that's not the arguement being made here.

The topic at hand is a gross violation of privacy with no decent justification behind it.

1. They also need to know if there is a chance you'll commit a crime in the future. Specifically a violent crime. Like that Doctor in the military who went crazy and started shooting everyone. Also, they'll redoubtably use it to 'keep tabs' on the employee. If you post something like 'Yeah, I let off the hook this time. I shouldn't have, but hey, he gave me $50.', then yeah, it's kind of their business to know that.

As for the whole 'I love you' notes...that's assuming that anyone cares. Yeah, okay, it's nice, and you and your girlfriend care, but do anyone else actually care? The Police aren't going to be searching through your messages looking for your Great-Grandmother's recipe for Apple Pie.

2. I imagine it would feel like I'm a celebrity and/or politician. But again, I'm not saying the whole world needs to know, just law enforcement.

3. FFFFFF. What makes it a human right? I keep asking this, but nobody is answering it. What makes something a human right? Why is that important? Who decides what is a human right?

Woah slow down here.... We decided it was a human right. The privacy right is a natural, necessary logical extension of other human rights. We have a right to control our own bodies, we have a right to say what we wish, and we have a right to our own image (as an extension of these). The privacy right evolved out of these. If we can say what we wish to and represent ourselves how we want, as a right (subject to limitations of fraud etc.) we have a right to nondisclosure, or privacy as well. Without one we cannot functionally have the other. We cannot represent ourselves to the world in whatever way we choose if our representation can be shattered by an overreach. We would lose these other rights (even if only fractions of them) but for a right of disclosure.

Further, many modern free countries have special provisions where we NEVER have to incriminate ourselves (the U.S. Fifth Amendment and others). We can simply elect not to speak and let the evidence do all of the work. To make our conversations available to law enforcement so corrodes this right as to render this right worthless as well.

The right to privacy is an extension and shield against corroding other rights we have, rights to property, speech, and control. That is all it is.