I consider myself to be pro-privacy and anti-surveillance, and I don't see anything here to be outraged about. An occupancy monitoring system that counts the number of filled seats in a university...
I consider myself to be pro-privacy and anti-surveillance, and I don't see anything here to be outraged about. An occupancy monitoring system that counts the number of filled seats in a university building, using anonymous thermal sensor data? This isn't "crotch monitoring," to call it that is beyond hyperbolic.
If desk utilization was a concern, the school was probably already doing manual head-counts from time to time. If anything, this method is less intrusive than that.
Seems to me, that trying to sneak the surveillance tech into a room full of infosec grad students was the height of stupidity. Seriously, what university administrator actually recommended that...
Seems to me, that trying to sneak the surveillance tech into a room full of infosec grad students was the height of stupidity. Seriously, what university administrator actually recommended that tactic?
Meanwhile, apart from the visceral unpleasantness of having a sensor pointed right at one's groin ... I already see a bunch of potential "meta-data"-like knock-on concerns. Maybe it's anonymous, but people habitually sit at the same desks repeatedly, or a year later, can find themselves being assigned to specific desks. And it's just a matter of time before data-analysts learn how to tease out user-identifiable data from minor differences in recorded temperatures, ranges, variability patterns, etc.
See comments at https://www.reddit.com/r/NEU/comments/xx7d7p/northeastern_graduate_students_privacy_is_being/ tl;dr: The "real" concern is that Northeastern allegedly wants to hot-desk the...
tl;dr: The "real" concern is that Northeastern allegedly wants to hot-desk the graduate students and ensure ISEC is at 100% capacity at all times (which is bad for many reasons), and these devices were intended to prove the grad students are not using their desks enough to warrant exclusive ownership.
The sensors are definitely bad from a privacy and ethics perspective (since it seems they violated some privacy laws), but it also sends a message that graduate students (and people supporting the grad students) won't stand for hot-desking.
I think the best summary was given here. And of course, sharing an office space would be incredibly distracting for the graduate students. It just reeks of an idea by administrators, for the...
So why was the university suddenly so interested in gathering fine-grained data on desk usage? I asked von Hippel and he told me: "They are proposing that grad students share desks, taking turns with a scheduling web-app, so administrators can take over some of the space currently used by grad students. Because as you know, research always works best when you have to schedule your thinking time."
And of course, sharing an office space would be incredibly distracting for the graduate students. It just reeks of an idea by administrators, for the benefit of administrators, and without consideration for anyone who isn't an administrator (to wit, the graduate students).
Graduate students are the lifeblood of a university. Just let them have their goddanged space.
By logic, there's nothing wrong with it. At least it's just as immoral as surveillance cameras, and most people are okay with those in a public setting. But I think the issue here is emotional....
By logic, there's nothing wrong with it. At least it's just as immoral as surveillance cameras, and most people are okay with those in a public setting. But I think the issue here is emotional. And emotion must be taken into account. No one likes having their private parts surveilled without their consent. That is a valid feeling to have.
The problem is that this is a stepping stone, what happens when they decide they don't have enough data? What happens when they decide to match occupancy data with wireless signal strength on...
The problem is that this is a stepping stone, what happens when they decide they don't have enough data? What happens when they decide to match occupancy data with wireless signal strength on student devices, bluetooth, communications. I'm not saying thats the goal, but it's a stepping stone towards worst and worst cases.
We don't know why they want that data, who wants that data, or what could be gained or lost because of it. What happens if a smaller marginalised group for example, were to have meetings and have their occupancy and real numbers tracked in real time, to know when potential issues are arising, how many there are in numbers, how often, when. It's not the fact that it's just to keep anonymized data on classes, this has implications that go far beyond what should be possible, especially at a university.
I consider myself to be pro-privacy and anti-surveillance, and I don't see anything here to be outraged about. An occupancy monitoring system that counts the number of filled seats in a university building, using anonymous thermal sensor data? This isn't "crotch monitoring," to call it that is beyond hyperbolic.
If desk utilization was a concern, the school was probably already doing manual head-counts from time to time. If anything, this method is less intrusive than that.
Seems to me, that trying to sneak the surveillance tech into a room full of infosec grad students was the height of stupidity. Seriously, what university administrator actually recommended that tactic?
Meanwhile, apart from the visceral unpleasantness of having a sensor pointed right at one's groin ... I already see a bunch of potential "meta-data"-like knock-on concerns. Maybe it's anonymous, but people habitually sit at the same desks repeatedly, or a year later, can find themselves being assigned to specific desks. And it's just a matter of time before data-analysts learn how to tease out user-identifiable data from minor differences in recorded temperatures, ranges, variability patterns, etc.
See comments at https://www.reddit.com/r/NEU/comments/xx7d7p/northeastern_graduate_students_privacy_is_being/
tl;dr: The "real" concern is that Northeastern allegedly wants to hot-desk the graduate students and ensure ISEC is at 100% capacity at all times (which is bad for many reasons), and these devices were intended to prove the grad students are not using their desks enough to warrant exclusive ownership.
The sensors are definitely bad from a privacy and ethics perspective (since it seems they violated some privacy laws), but it also sends a message that graduate students (and people supporting the grad students) won't stand for hot-desking.
I think the best summary was given here.
And of course, sharing an office space would be incredibly distracting for the graduate students. It just reeks of an idea by administrators, for the benefit of administrators, and without consideration for anyone who isn't an administrator (to wit, the graduate students).
Graduate students are the lifeblood of a university. Just let them have their goddanged space.
By logic, there's nothing wrong with it. At least it's just as immoral as surveillance cameras, and most people are okay with those in a public setting. But I think the issue here is emotional. And emotion must be taken into account. No one likes having their private parts surveilled without their consent. That is a valid feeling to have.
The problem is that this is a stepping stone, what happens when they decide they don't have enough data? What happens when they decide to match occupancy data with wireless signal strength on student devices, bluetooth, communications. I'm not saying thats the goal, but it's a stepping stone towards worst and worst cases.
We don't know why they want that data, who wants that data, or what could be gained or lost because of it. What happens if a smaller marginalised group for example, were to have meetings and have their occupancy and real numbers tracked in real time, to know when potential issues are arising, how many there are in numbers, how often, when. It's not the fact that it's just to keep anonymized data on classes, this has implications that go far beyond what should be possible, especially at a university.