jsnell
4499
No, I have 10x as many meetings internally than with job candidates so that’s where the majority of my anecdata is from.
Why is it obvious that job candidates would prefer to keep their cameras on but then switch them off once they’re hired? I’m not telling them to turn the camera on, nor are the recruiters.
In our org, it’s about 30/70 with the majority keeping their camera off unless someone on the meeting turns theirs on and cajoles everyone with something awful like “C’mon! Let’s see some smiles!”
A job candidate would be foolish to not use a camera.
I’m doing some corporate training for remote employees (individual contributors, largely 20 to 30-somethings), and when it isn’t required it’s suggested for them. Still not even half use it.
I consistently get the impression they don’t feel “ready for primetime.”
I don’t know the exact percentage. I do know that my number of Zoom meetings has gone down, over the course of the pandemic and the percentage of people who have their camera on has also decreased.
Enidigm
4503
There’s a strong element of seniority in camera on / camera off. People “who matter” are generally going to keep their camera on. People on the team who are expected to attend but don’t expect to contribute will tend to keep their camera off. I guess at the highest level Presidents ect can just do whatever they want, but generally the leads or PM or whatever are going to all be well dressed and camera on, and everyone below them will decline in camera use the further down the ladder they go. Also, there’s a kind of courtesy thing… it helps the connection and tbh most of the time it’s almost (just a tiny bit) like wanting to be seen, which may or may not be relevant to the person.
Now it’s not, but what about when the tech is so good that the 3d model and facial/body movement is practically indistinguishable from the real person? That’s what they’re chasing, 1:1 simulation of reality.
It’s like you haven’t watched any of their tech demos… :P
Aah, a fellow fan of Music ⚡ Band, I see.
Zylon
4509
Oh, so they came up with something better then.
ShivaX
4510
Somehow Twitter’s bots couldn’t detect this:
But you know, don’t talk about Monster Hunter or police brutality, you’ll get your account locked in less than 30 seconds. Pray someone kills someone and an hour later Twitter is like “whatever”.
Facebook is shutting down its face-recognition system because now it’s Meta’s face-recognition system.
That’s quite an about-face.
Menzo
4514
Well this is an interesting way to address part of the problem with social media. Surprisingly simple, though I’m sure it’ll get mangled somehow.
Remember, there was a time when you could browse Facebook by “new” instead of letting them decide what you see.
I wonder how many Republicans will sign up for this, since it seems like they rely on Facebook’s algorithm to send people down the Q-hole.
The Filter Bubble Transparency Act would require internet platforms to let people use a version of their services where content selections are not driven by algorithms. It’s sponsored by Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), David Cicilline (D-R.I.), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) and Burgess Owens (R-Utah). The Senate version of the bill, also bipartisan, is sponsored by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), an influential member of Republican leadership. Buck and Cicilline are the bipartisan duo responsible for passing six antitrust bills out of the House Judiciary committee in June. Buck and Thune plan to work together on tech and antitrust issues going forward, a Republican aide told Axios. That could boost the chances of such bills passing muster with Senate Republicans in the future.
In the strictest sense, “sort by newest” is an algorithm, so yeah super easy to mangle, hardly an inconvenience.
Timex
4516
It’s a complex issue, I think.
Some elements of the GOP are all in on the grift, and want to exploit this as much as possible.
But I think there is a very large contingent of the GOP establishment who only go along with that stuff because they are fucking terrified of their own base. For those folks, I could see them actually wanting to end the mill that’s producing all that crap, even if they might be afraid to say it out loud.
Some of CNN’s “Trumping Democracy” documentary has covered some of this, with folks like Kinsinger pointing out that he knows members, who he names, who specifically refused to go along with some of the crazy shit… but then ended up going along with it after it got into the media and they started getting pressured to do so.
A lot of the GOP right now are just abject cowards.
Timex
4517
In the context of this bill, they narrow things to essentially be requiring that providers make available a version that does not leverage user-specific data tracking.
It doesn’t ban what goes on currently, but it makes it so that people can opt out of that version, and easily (via an on screen button) flip to a version that does not use any kind of tracking that views their computer as different from any other.
Menzo
4518
I’m sure now that Facebook knows about this bill they will dispatch their lobbyists to talk to their friends in Congress about how this proposal is the literal END OF THE WORLD. We’ll see if lobbying dollars can overcome people’s enmity for the platform.
