>“Within three or four years, every single ID badge is going to have these sensors,” predicted Ben Waber, chief executive of Humanyze, a Boston-based employee analytics company.

>Those concerned about their privacy might be alarmed by the arrival of such badges. But Humanyze says it doesn’t record the content of what people say, just how they say it. And the boss doesn’t get to look at individuals’ personal data. It is also up to the employee to decide whether they want to participate.

Employees can choose whether they would like to participate, but it will be in every ID badge in 3-4 years?

I'm not really well informed about the science of speech analysis, but I'm going to assume raw audio is recorded at some stage, and since the device is the size of a credit card, I'll also assume it's not being processed on the device.

I don't see how this could possibly be as anonymized as they claim. You're also painting a target for rival enterprises or states who would like to carry out espionage against you, which seems like a legitimate concern in the financial industry.

You're on company time, why not just have a huge physical neck collar, with a chain, to ensure your paid time is spent productively at your desk. 9-5 you're a company resource after all

> The beacons tracking your movements are omitted from bathroom locations, to give you some privacy.

Oh why even bother. Just do it in the bathroom as well. I like how it tracks everything and then throws that little -- but look, we are concerned for your privacy, we are not creepy at all.

> If you don’t give people choice, if you don’t aggregate instead of showing individual data,

Yes, let's aggregate data in some obscure way, while hand waving about "anonymizing" stuff. People will totally buy that, and trust us.

> Their bodies swiftly respond to stressful situations and relax when calm returns, leaving them primed for the next challenge,”

Lovely.

-"Steve, I think that patch froze the kernel".

-"Sorry, I am doing my daily hyperventilating and then calming down thing, to get my stats up for upcoming reviews. Ask the intern to restart everything. I'll be there in 30 min".

I don't understand how anyone can say something like "It is also up to the employee to decide whether they want to participate." with a straight face. All historical evidence points to the fact that people will be "encouraged" to the point where this becomes mandatory.

Engineers who help create stuff like this are assholes. How could you see this being used for good in any way?

I'd turn my notice in immediately. We are people not machines. This would not encourage good culture. In fact, it would sink moral.

In ways, this is interesting. This is analyzing one's performance skill based on their behavior and physical clues. There should most definitely be a correlation, and I personally believe that one's mental state is most crucial indication for productivity at a deskjob. At the moment, it's demoralizing since there are very few known solutions to improve those that are naturally not talented in that department (including me). But, as more research in those areas happen, this might become a standard. It's kind of like if you are an athlete, you show your condition via your scores/times. To improve, you practice and workout. As a deskjob, you show your condition via new mental checking technology, and to improve you do things that come out of these research

I remember the PARC smart badge system, had a similar sort of push back. Sure there were "good" things like quick attendance count at meetings and an easy to use "where is Bob?" sort of service, but on balance it was a net negative on the employee.

NOPE.

Quitting the second someone asks me to wear one. End of story.

They're pushing that it's mainly for the benefit of the employee, not the employer. Or at least they're trying to make it seem that way.

If so, why not just make it a consumer-targeted product? Something only the badge holder can view data for?

Companies that do this should stop saying 'employees' and use 'meat robots'.

This is certainly one way to run a business. But I'd rather work for a company that trusts me enough that they don't need to micromanage me.

Er, this is basically just a puff piece for a startup. Why are people reading it like it indicates the world is moving in a particular direction? There's no more reason this idea is going to succeed than any other. In fact it seems kind of doomed to fail.

Despite the claim that data will be aggregated and opt-in collection, it doesn't change the fact that the next company to produce something similar will offer any of those features. So the privacy concerns are very valid. Not least of all because most people take their employee badge home! I don't even see how it will be legitimately helpful to a manager to see how people speak in aggregate. And no doubt people will game the system, etc, etc.

It sounds like I will have to charge my ID. Nope.

Wet dream for insecure control-freak managers

Your efficiency has dropped 10%, so we're cutting your wage.

As measured by time spent at the desk?

Had these inventors concentrated on providing value to the employee, they would not get so much privacy concerns.

Instead they focused on the corporate overlord to make it mainstream.

Are they aiming for as many enemies as possible?

At least the micro-position-tracking ability makes sense in high(est)-security environments, be them military or private (Apple's secret labs come to my mind, given the rumors of secrecy?).

The voice analyzation stuff is really, really weird though.

Eh, some people just want to put food on the table and pay their debts. They aren't as responsible as you or me.

Engineers who help create stuff like this are assholes.

Asshole is s pretty strong word. There's a somewhat different explanation; it posits that engineers are ignorant rather than evil. Cory Doctorow said it better than I ever could:

   Engineers are all basically high-functioning
   autistics who have no idea how normal people
   do stuff.

I got a lot of flack last time I posted that quip; I'll grant that it isn't strictly accurate in a medical sense. But it gets the point across. Engineers simply don't think the same way that muggles think, and in addition they're unable or unwilling to view the world from that different perspective.