- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
She stopped responding to him, she said, even though he texted and called her hundreds of times.
Ms. Dowdall, 59, started occasionally seeing a strange new message on the display in her Mercedes, about a location-based service called “mbrace.” The second time it happened, she took a photograph and searched for the name online.
“I realized, oh my God, that’s him tracking me,” Ms. Dowdall said.
I love that the focus of this article is privacy and not the fact that an individual trusted to be working for the nation at a federal fucking level did some abusive, manipulative shit.
Is it really that hard to filter out scum from the application process or is it just that nobody cares because they follow orders (as long as it serves their interests)
This happens again and again and again. At every level, public and private.
The answer is not “filter these people out of these jobs” because very often they have no prior records. Or sometimes someone gets phished. The answer is to stop enabling this in the first place.
Can you speak more to what you mean by enabling? And who’s enabling who?
Can you read the article first?
I was asking the commenter to clarify their statement/opinion, not the fucking article but thanks for the rude ass comment dude:
But wasn’t it obvious that by “enabling” he meant the pervasiveness of privacy invasive things and company policies? In this case specifically the inability to turn off location tracking within the car. And I get it, a thief could disable it then as well, but they had her name since she was the one paying the loan, and a thief could also remove/block the cellular connectivity module.
And why would I make an assumption of someone’s thoughts? Especially someone on the internet I don’t know in the slightest.
Fuck off dude, wasn’t even talking to you to begin with and you’re just out here picking fights
Now’s the time to read your bio
I’m respectful to start, you took away that respect from yourself when you made an ignorant ass passive aggressive comment to me.
Also your name is literally asbestos. Pretty obvious troll. Bye bye now.
He may have been hired while he was still “the charming man [the abused woman] had fallen in love with.” I bet it’s very difficult to catch an employee who’s (slowly?) gone bad, and perhaps only in a certain context - perhaps he was always a great employee but became a terrible husband.
Note he died by suicide, so I expect some part of the situation caused him intolerable distress. Sad situation.
Like Paultimate said, we do have to fix the car privacy problem. But I’m sure more can be done to continually re-evaluate clearanced employees too.
I agree about privacy, don’t get me wrong. But I think the bigger problem isn’t the tech (gun) they’re using it’s the people themselves. If this guy wanted to he could go online and find a billion different types of trackers which would work just the same.
I don’t see a point in chasing down shoplifters when there’s obviously a factory churning out more of them down the street.
No one is allowed to give a fuck or they’re out of a job. Corporations love AI development because it will give them the obedient machines they need to do whatever they want without pesky human morality or emotions getting in the way.
Don’t forget the military!
and company doesnt care about domestic abuse
Courts should order car companies to revoke all access to the vehicle for the person losing the car, and grant all to the one gaining exclusive use of it when they order a car to one person
I would have my lawyer ask for such orders were I to become divorced again, whichever of us got the car