Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 33 of 33
  1. #21  
    My shiny, two month old Treo 600 is for sale on eBay as of last night.

    Why? Because our corporate security department put out the official word that camera phones could no longer be brought in the building as of today. They are now providing the 'corporate approved' phone - a Nokia 6340i. No exeptions. No ifs, ands, questions, or buts. First offense - warning. Second, the door.

    So goes another excellent technology, killed in it's prime by overzealous management. Figures.
    Scott
  2. #22  
    Are they afraid you will commit espionage? You could sneak in a Minox or something if you were so inclined. Have they had trouble with cameras in the locker room? Or the Ladies room? Do you work for the government? Or an ObGyn clinic? C'mon. Using the Treo600 in camera mode is really, really obvious. It's not like you're going to fool someone with it. Give me a break!
  3. #23  
    You're asking all the same questions I was, my friend. We're just your average fortune 500 company, and apparently our technology managers are reading the same overzealous tech rags some of the other folks are. 'Protect yourself from liability! These camera phones are a threat to privacy and information security."

    They're all drinkin' Drain-o, IMHO. It's just another perfect example of newer, better technology getting squashed out of the corporate environment because somebody read a Gartner-esque report about the dangers of cell phone cameras. Gimme a break.
    Scott
  4. #24  
    Things are so outa control. cameras aren't allowed in the courthouse, so security locks them up. there goes my means of communication, my entertainment while waiting, and, of course, my calendar!
    I can't believe I need to get a second phone JUST for court!
    Cause I'm not giving up my treo..................
  5. #25  
    I understand your frustration. It's absolutely ridiculous to have to carry two cell phones.

    As for me, I still had my Tungsten/T, so I pulled it out, dusted it off, and went back to a phone and PDA again. It was really nice having one device there, for a while. But, <sigh>... The decision has been made.
    Scott
  6. #26  
    Naivete is not a justification for violating security.

    Is the Security Department afraid of you spying?

    No.

    They already have rules/laws about that.

    The Security Department is afraid a bunch of dumb ****s will whip out their camera, take a picture, send it out over the 'Net, and only later see that the whiteboard in the background has the corporate strategy diagrammed on it.

    You bring a camera into a secure installation and eventually it'll get used.

    You use a camera in a secure installation and eventually it will take a picture of something it shouldn't have.

    Ipso facto - no cameras allowed.
  7. #27  
    If anybody needs to get rid of their lens, I'll swap you out for mine! Mine's all scratched up, and should meet all your security needs. I'm sure somebody would be daring enough to see if you can open it up and swap it out........
  8. #28  
    This all reminds me of the IT people at my place of employment. They would be really happy if they could find some way to keep everyone from using their precious computers and networks. Less work for them.

    If someone wants to spy, they will do so. A phone camera is pretty obvious when in use. A Minox is less obvious. There are now video cameras hidden in sunglasses that cost a hundred bucks or so, which are pretty much undetectable (although the sunglasses thing inside the office might be a little suspicious).

    If everyone with a phone camera is a potential spy for the competition, then maybe no one should be allowed to take notes in a meeting; that white board might still find its way to the wrong hands.

    Oh, and an innocent photo has the potential to open up all of a company's secrets. Sure, at the very limits of possibility. So tell everyone to keep the phone in the pocket during the bloody meeting. Dictating what phone you can and can't have is a little bit over the top.

    This attitude is absolutely rediculous. We are now potentially guilty until proven innocent. We can't be trusted with a phone that has a camera with a picture that doesn't even rival a Kodak Brownie from 100 years ago. Yup, just like my IT folks...lots easier just to keep you off the system than to keep it running.

    Welcome to 1984. Big Brother is watching you, and taking away your phones.
  9. #29  
    Tis sad indeed. But, I think the decision by some companies banning camphones may rethink this in the near future. As more of them are available, which is inevitable, coupled with the fact of their usefulness, some corporate edicts will be revisited.
  10. #30  
    > ...Oh, and an innocent photo has the potential to open
    > up all of a company's secrets. Sure, at the very limits of
    > possibility...

    You apparently have no idea what security is all about.

    Fortunately, those in charge of security usually do.

    Are they hard-nosed? Yes - they NEED to be.

    >> You bring a camera into a secure installation and
    >> eventually it'll get used.
    >>
    >> You use a camera in a secure installation and
    >> eventually it will take a picture of something it
    >> shouldn't have.

    With respect to companies becoming more lenient about cameraphones - that's REAL unlikely. As they become more AWARE of cameraphones they will begin to apply the exact same restrictions - MINIMALLY - as they have for cameras.

    I can EASILY see companies start to ban personal PHONES in a quest to control inadvertant external communications.

    Let's never forget THE secure installation - No Such Agency - that even banned the Furby (Furbie?)...
  11. #31  
    SV, I shall not get into it with you. I understand security and confidentiality far better than most. I also believe in freedom, and in treating one's employees and colleagues like ADULTS. I wouldn't work for anyone that refuses to do so in the name of overblown, paranoid security.
    Last edited by Dalai Lama; 01/31/2004 at 07:23 AM.
  12. Quake97's Avatar
    Posts
    557 Posts
    Global Posts
    598 Global Posts
    #32  
    I agree and disagree with the corporations disallowing camera phones. On one hand its a worthless picture but on the other it might be good enough to show off a new product.

    The thing that most consumers are worried about is taking pictures that shouldn't be taken. There's some website out there, forget that name, where people post pictures of the best butts of chicks and then rate them.

    Joe
  13. #33  
    So, once again the American public has to suffer because of the puerile activities of a few idiots. Again, those bent on taking surreptitios photos will find a way to do so, phone or otherwise. I still maintain that if you treat your employees and colleagues with respect, you will be rewarded with their loyalty and best efforts. Treat them as the enemy and as children, and you create resentment that just might ultimately breed the behaviour everyone so fears.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions