I find it alarming that to "protect" women, men have to be surveilled secretly in all public places. This is way beyond dystopian.

AI and remote security personnel get to decide if someone is "a predator" and take 'em down preemptively if they look suspicious.

What could possibly go wrong?

I don't usually have sufficient motivation to post much on any social media platform. This is rare for me. I am putting this out in the world in part hoping for some validation, in part hoping it sparks some kind of social action to save some semblance of privacy and dignity in this modern world.

Warning: this is long.

I just wrote an email to a recruiter withdrawing my interest in pursuing a job (it's a recruiter hired by the hiring company). I am a software engineer with decades of experience who has been unemployed for almost a year with almost no interviews. I'm hungry for paying work. Yet. I did this. Below is the email I wrote, and it is hopefully self explanatory.

I think my career might be over - especially if the kind of process I experienced is now the standard for hiring. I want nothing to do with it.

I wrote this after multiple days of trying to set up my system for the "assessment". I ended up having to install Windows 11 (I'm a Linux guy) because the assessment environment simply didn't work. I tried FireFox, disabled plugins, tried two versions of Chrome - neither would work. It apparently had to be the Google version.

I upgraded an old version of Win 10 (because Microsoft pretty much forced it). Got it to work on Firefox for Windows.

Twice, mid-way through the assessment, it reset itself to square one. I didn't try a third time. This assessment software monitored my face and would raise an alarm if I looked away. It controlled my microphone. It required full access to every aspect of the browser and had me do an alt-tab partway through this "test" in order to ensure I wasn't using any other software. Insulting. Invasive. My equipment. My home.

---- the email ----8<----

First, I appreciate your understanding and that you gave me what information you have on how this software works. Now, the hard part. My disappointment will show in the text, and it is not directed at you or your company.

I'm inclined to cease pursuing this. I feel insulted by the process in the first place, but went through it understanding that we, as job seekers, have to accept compromises we would not otherwise accept because having a job is a fundamental requirement to literally survive and provide for our children.

However, the more I'm expected to change my personal, owned equipment and software in an invasive fashion just so some stranger can have 100% surveillance on my activities in my home in order to be considered for a job interview, the more insulted I become.

Granted, I'm unusual. I've dedicated myself to protecting my electronic privacy by installing malware and advertisement blockers on my phones, computers, tablets. I use VPN. I built my own home NAS because I am uncomfortable with placing all my personal, financial, and health records into "the cloud" (and being charged for the privilege). I am teaching myself how to use AI by downloading and running models in my home lab because I don't want to give out my privacy and income to strangers.

I stopped using Windows at home years ago because I could not stand the way it was dictating to me how to run my computer and constantly seeking to part me from my money with distracting advertisements while siphoning everything about me back to their servers to better market to me. Worse, it was forcing me to buy new hardware in order to simply run the system after upgrades.

Here I am, faced with a stark choice. Debase my values for the sake of the possibility of a job with a company that apparently doesn't consider applicants worthy of dignity, or remain unemployed - possibly forced to exit the career I love if everybody is doing this - and potentially fall into poverty.

If they're doing this before they even talk to me, it tells me that as an employee I will have at minimum this same level of surveillance. Knowing this in the back of my mind will burn me out in under six months.

Unfortunately, I don't think I could live with myself if I chose the first option, so I respectfully withdraw myself from this process. I'm a professional. I expect to be treated like one. If there are companies who are serious about hiring a professional, I'm all in. Please engage me.

The most affluent consumers account for a bigger share of total US spending, reinforcing the lopsided dynamic of unbothered consumption for the wealthy and more cautious shopping for everyone else.

It's been a few years since I've needed to install a version of Windows on a PC for personal use. I have a license for Windows 10 Pro, but today I found out it is no longer possible to get through the installation without first creating an account with Microsoft.

I don't want to do this. Does anybody have any way to get around it? The stuff I've read online basically ends up being create your account switch to a local account after installation and delete your account. I want a better solution. Would installing a much older version of Windows 10 work? The whole reason I got an msdn license back in the day is so I didn't have to do this.

Edit: 10/2/2023

I thank you all for giving me advice and ideas. Much I had already tried before posting my question here, and some suggestions and experiences led me to keep at it. Here's my experience for others who have a similar problem.

I downloaded the ISO from Microsoft - Win10_22H2_English_x64v1. I used Ventoy to launch the installer. The first time I went through, I connected to Wi-Fi. As soon as I did that, it sealed my fate. By this time in the process, it installed the boot partition on my HD and saved this information so every time I tried to restart the installer, it always went through language, keyboard, then "enter email address". All the suggestions for fake values simply triggered "This email is already used. Please choose another", and that was it.

I was getting ready to wipe the partition and try again, but decided to turn off Wi-Fi in the BIOS first to see if that worked. It did. This time it tried to convince me to set up the network and failed and I was able to create a local account.

The way this multi-version installer works is annoying. It installed Windows Home edition, so I had to "know" that I could go to settings and enter a key. Once I put in the key, it "upgraded" to Pro edition, and I was done.

Next time I have to do this, I'll see if Rufus works. It seems that will remove some annoyance. Either way, I will avoid configuring Wi-Fi until after install next time. I gotta say, I am not looking forward to the day when I must upgrade to Windows 11. So far I've been able to avoid actually buying a new copy due to my aging MSDN key. By the time I'm forced to "upgrade", I might have to cough up some cash for something I don't want, but am forced to own.

It should be illegal.

Anyway, now that I know I can still use my MSDN key to get an updated Win 10, I feel a bit more comfortable with re-imaging my Dell laptop from dual-boot to Linux only, then install Windows as a VM for these times I need to use it. Fortunately, that is increasingly rare.

I included a comment that is a prime example of how willfully blind people are concerning the value of privacy. This was part of a thread about a mews post of a person who had his Amazon Smart Home bricked because a delivery person thought he was racist.

It's a troubling read, because if most people really are this way, the fight for legally enforced privacy will fail.

What do you think of this?

Do you think they could have turned off the in the first place if they did not have personal details tied to those devices and full control of those devices?

Yes, assuming that we still need an input device of some sort. Because the input could make it give a different output, such as not running, even if it didn't know that you were the one it was blocking.

Maybe that couldn't cascade to all of your devices, but certainly the ones that received the input that caused them to brick themselves. But, then again in a mesh network they probably could send a brick signal to all co-networked devices.

What if someone decided to use something you did in the "privacy" of your own home to blackmail you? Embarass you? Would you feel safe?

I certainly wouldn't like that. Fortunately, those actions are illegal. The problem here isn't privacy, so much as it is blackmail.

It doesn't matter to me, if a passive recording picks up me doing something embarrassing. The thing that matters is using the data in the wrong way, or not having controls around the data.

What if something you do all the time suddenly becomes illegal and you could be prosecuted based on surveillance footage inside your home?

Well, I guess I'd better stop doing that thing or move. But, that is only marginally relevant to this case.

If you are a criminal, there will be evidence of the crime.

Do you think they cannot access the video and audio from those devices?

Sure they can, but passive access isn't a problem. The problem is using the data badly.