Comments on: Personal Use http://eric.clst.org/mystery/archives/34 gathering threads of technology, libraries, and leadership Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:22:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Pam Hoffman http://eric.clst.org/mystery/archives/34#comment-7 Pam Hoffman Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:27:31 +0000 http://eric.clst.org/mystery/archives/34#comment-7 This may seem radical but as a privacy issue, putting 'personal' information on a device (or online) that can be taken away is probably not in someone's best interest. I stopped adding emails to my Yahoo! accounts a long time ago. I became aware that I was putting a LOT of 'personal' information on a server that, really, anyone could take a look at. I do everything from my own database. It may be slightly more cumbersome but I'm pretty sure Yahoo! (or anyone else) does not have access to any of it. These are my family and friends - I won't have that info getting around! It is entirely possible to 'lead the way' and start a company that will have all the things that 'should' be ok - like the IM system. Abuse is inevitable and porn sites are reprehensible at the work site. The manager should be reprimaded as well, IMHO. If I ever got a PDA from work - you bet it would ONLY have work stuff on it. Pam Hoffman Eric's cousin ;) This may seem radical but as a privacy issue, putting ‘personal’ information on a device (or online) that can be taken away is probably not in someone’s best interest.

I stopped adding emails to my Yahoo! accounts a long time ago. I became aware that I was putting a LOT of ‘personal’ information on a server that, really, anyone could take a look at.

I do everything from my own database. It may be slightly more cumbersome but I’m pretty sure Yahoo! (or anyone else) does not have access to any of it. These are my family and friends - I won’t have that info getting around!

It is entirely possible to ‘lead the way’ and start a company that will have all the things that ’should’ be ok - like the IM system. Abuse is inevitable and porn sites are reprehensible at the work site. The manager should be reprimaded as well, IMHO.

If I ever got a PDA from work - you bet it would ONLY have work stuff on it.

Pam Hoffman
Eric’s cousin ;)

]]> By: John http://eric.clst.org/mystery/archives/34#comment-5 John Wed, 19 May 2004 02:00:47 +0000 http://eric.clst.org/mystery/archives/34#comment-5 I've seen many similar attitudes in IT departments. I think many policies are based on fear of some kind of liability. Some are based on lack of understanding of the new technology and a fear of a support nightmare or security breaches. Our IT department went into overdrive a while ago when someone was caught viewing pornographic materials on the internet at work. A new policy came down from above and IT implimented it. Using Novell Border Manager, everyone had to log-in to proceed to the internet and every site being visited was being tracked and monitored. They fired the guy who did it, and there were no more cases discovered of viewing porn on the company PC's. But everyone else was still subjected to the new security measures. The funny thing is, the Manager of that person did not know what his employee was doing and when the person was let go, it came from above, not from the manager. I feel that when the IT department and upper management set policies based on fear, they undermine creativity and motivation and innovation. Another good example is the edition of chat in our workgroup. We had it on our systems and were using it productively to communicate with each other while working. It was faster than email, more flexible and we were more productive. But when the IT department management found out, they instantly had it removed because 'instant messaging' was not allowed on work PC's. There is definately a difference between serving the business needs of the organization and controlling the organization's liability or potential liability. But some of the people making the policies don't see the difference. Controlling the 'business needs' seems to be equal to controlling liability. It's inhibiting to growth. John I’ve seen many similar attitudes in IT departments. I think many policies are based on fear of some kind of liability. Some are based on lack of understanding of the new technology and a fear of a support nightmare or security breaches. Our IT department went into overdrive a while ago when someone was caught viewing pornographic materials on the internet at work. A new policy came down from above and IT implimented it. Using Novell Border Manager, everyone had to log-in to proceed to the internet and every site being visited was being tracked and monitored. They fired the guy who did it, and there were no more cases discovered of viewing porn on the company PC’s. But everyone else was still subjected to the new security measures. The funny thing is, the Manager of that person did not know what his employee was doing and when the person was let go, it came from above, not from the manager. I feel that when the IT department and upper management set policies based on fear, they undermine creativity and motivation and innovation. Another good example is the edition of chat in our workgroup. We had it on our systems and were using it productively to communicate with each other while working. It was faster than email, more flexible and we were more productive. But when the IT department management found out, they instantly had it removed because ‘instant messaging’ was not allowed on work PC’s. There is definately a difference between serving the business needs of the organization and controlling the organization’s liability or potential liability. But some of the people making the policies don’t see the difference. Controlling the ‘business needs’ seems to be equal to controlling liability. It’s inhibiting to growth.
John

]]>