Comment by lern_too_spel
13 days ago
You agreed that your employer should be able to check that the devices you use to connect to its network are not rooted. You quibbled over the definition of "your device" against the HN guidelines. When you ask most people whose phone or laptop is on a table, they'll say it's theirs, not that it's Company X's device that they are using to do work for that company.
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize."
> You agreed that your employer should be able to check that the devices you use to connect to its network are not rooted.
Okay I see the issue. No I do not agree with that. I'm saying if they want that guarantee then they can isolate the network. But if they don't isolate the network then it's all on them, they do not get to check all devices.
That's why my point is not just a quibble.
Also responding to the strongest interpretation sometimes means making that interpretation explicit, to make sure everyone is on the same page. In this case making the actual ownership clear. I'm not trying to dunk on you or whatever.
> But if they don't isolate the network then it's all on them, they do not get to check all devices.
This is a ridiculous point to think that I disagreed about. Of course they don't get to check that your TV and your washing machine have been rooted. I explicitly specified your devices connected to your employer's network. You're trying to interpret this in a way that doesn't make sense simply to find a point of disagreement where there is none.
Ha, now I feel like you're going out of your way to misinterpret me.
"the network" is the same network we've been talking about the entire conversation. Employer's network.
Obviously they can't control what I plug into a network they don't know about, I don't know why you think I was trying to argue that or how it's the strongest interpretation of my comment.
4 replies →