News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Tell HN: Otter.ai bot recording meetings without consent by ImPostingOnHN on Wednesday September 07, 2022 @01:50PM (#32753780)
> If you install recording software, you're liable for what it records

not if it's recording without your consent

> Seriously, this thread is "I installed recording software and it worked on things I didn't think it would.

a poor attempt to reframe the thread, which is actually about a company monitoring confidential meetings without consent

if affirmative consent is such a non-issue here, why couldn't the company get it?

Re:Tell HN: Otter.ai bot recording meetings without consent by noasaservice on Wednesday September 07, 2022 @01:59PM (#32753911)
TBH, the pro-business blatantly illegal hot takes here on HN are expected.

Because some company figured out a 'hack' to make more money, somehow turns from illegal to "legal". And so many users here will defend that.

In this case, it's violating interstate wiretapping laws and state-based 2 party consent laws. But.. they just squint hard and go "Hey we can violate the law and make MORE money".

Uber is exactly that. So is AirBNB. So is Lime/Bird. Just go look at much of the tech companies, and it's "Offline company + way to break law to get money + ONLINE!!!!1!!1!"

Re:Tell HN: Otter.ai bot recording meetings without consent by sergefaguet on Wednesday September 07, 2022 @02:59PM (#32754872)
Change by definition requires breaking established rules and is how societies grow. Normal part of the process.
Re:Tell HN: Otter.ai bot recording meetings without consent by ImPostingOnHN on Wednesday September 07, 2022 @07:37PM (#32758791)
change doesn't require breaking established laws, however, and that's what we're talking about
Re:Tell HN: Otter.ai bot recording meetings without consent by sergefaguet on Thursday September 08, 2022 @02:14PM (#32769555)
Doesn’t require it but it is ok if that happens.
Re:Tell HN: Otter.ai bot recording meetings without consent by ImPostingOnHN on Friday September 09, 2022 @02:27PM (#32783073)
I'm not convinced, but I don't doubt that there is at least 1 person out of billions who believes that to be so