Re: Well, surprisingly, yes.

Date: 2009-08-17 09:36 pm (UTC)
I can actually see a value in something like indiscreet Facebook photos - think of it as a security bozo-filter. Careless idiot got busted over harmless-to-the-company personal photos, as opposed to... well, I imagine as your PA, some pretty confidential (of interest to competitors or evil types, or just the media) information would cross your desk and therefore hers.

One assumes she embarrassedly turned in her notice a few days later?

I'd have less of an issue with engineers getting stoned (if at home) - at my last regular company (left at the end of May `07), probably more of the Boston office *did* use illicit stuff than didn't. Still, that was a tech startup, not a company with major security interests, and the same "people who are careless with personal data are likely to be careless with company data" thing definitely applies.

It comes to mind that while everybody at aforementioned company knew that at least a third of the office were potheads and that if the CEO didn't do pot or acid *now*, he certainly had pretty regularly in the past... you couldn't have found a jot in writing about it, anywhere.

Maybe in personal LJs and the like - but those (like mine) would have had zero identifying data that Google could connect to the person's real name, email-addy-on-resume, and so on.
Anonymous( )Anonymous This account has disabled anonymous posting.
OpenID( )OpenID You can comment on this post while signed in with an account from many other sites, once you have confirmed your email address. Sign in using OpenID.
Account name:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.


Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.


ratseal: (Default)

April 2013

141516 17181920

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 10:59 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios