Social Media background check

There was a thread on twitter a friend showed me about the 300+ page background check they did on a employee before hiring them. They had a script go through the word choice of their tweets and make judgement calls on which were good and bad to make hiring choices on them. How can people look at this soykaf and still use social media, or at least have it not tide to there irl identity. >thread https://twitter.com/kmlefranc/status/1221869659139366912

tied*

I don't use Twitter except professionally. I'm not sure why people are on there.

It's another the Internet is actually the real world shocker.

>How can people look at this soykaf and still use social media The Anglosphere has a fuarrrked up relationship with social media. I can't speak for people outside it, but I can say for certain that people here will think lesser of you if you do not use social media at all. They assume you are a WN/anarchist/tankie/incel/etc. if you refuse to use social media entirely, because if you didn't have a dirty secret why WOULDN'T you share your life with everyone? The current zeitgeist has an obsession with saving face in order to avoid being cancelled. This applies to corporations as well. You do not want to hire a /problematic/ person because your company could get scorched by blue checkmarks for the crime of giving said person a livelihood. A person with no social media is an unknown, and you do not want to take the risk of hiring them, and then somebody finds out they were problematic all along. Denying that you are a bad person trying to hide your badness is only an admission of guilt in the eyes of these people.

https://fama.io/about/ look at this soykaf just look at it also lol at the bottom of the page saying "we respect your privacy" when their company is the very embodiment of being nosy

>>15891 You should read some of the crap in the report, the false positive and false negative ratio is awful; it's to the point where it's almost comedic.

>>15891 god is dead and we killed him P R O T E C T Y O U R C U L T U R E P R O T E C T Y O U R B R A N D There exists this notion of people personally having to defend something they associate with. This protectionism (I realize I'm just flinging labels but this soykaf is really old by now) is making immigrants suffer, throttling innovation with gay IP laws. How this insufferable trick is still employed to get people on a bandwagon is really beyond me. Got reminded by a good quote however: "Overprotecting intellectual property is as harmful as underprotecting it. Culture isn't possible without a rich public domain. "Nothing today, like nothing since we tamed fire is genuinely new. Culture, like science and technology grows by accretion, each new creator building on the works of those who came before. Overprotection stifles the very creative forces it's supposed to nurture" - Alex Kozinski (2003) to end my schizophrenic post, pic related is also interesting as a portrayal of what the internet has become

1. Do not use your real name on the Internet. 2. Whatever ends up on Internet, stays there forever. This woman failed to comply to both of them.

>>15948 sad to admit but that's bassically where we are heading now. But then again, with the advancement of botnets and stuff like that it's nearly impossible to keep your internet identity away from your real identity. It's easy these to find anything about you simply by googling your name people can find your social medias, it's messed up but it's happened before.

>>15948 >Do not use your real name on the Internet. What if it is too late. :'( What if i only use a google account and nothing else?

>>15959 There's cleaner services that kind of work, at least for actors below a certain level of motivation. I've known people who had to run away from abusive families/spouses who have used them to some success. I suspect it would be good enough for some of these hiring background checks, but probably not good enough for like a security check for a government job or w/e. Basically they go around and know who to call/contact to send those data deletion requests and do it all in a huge batch that they all have kind of down pat. One could do it themselves but sometimes if it's important it makes sense to get a professional.

>>15959 It's never too late to migrate, either via a cleaning service like the other lainon suggests or just starting small and letting the account with your real name and the things associated with them slowly dissolve into oblivion

>>15965 If the account doesn't show up on the first 5 pages on Google, is it fine?

If I Google my real name with strict search queries and absolutely nothing appears, am I safe? How do I mimic this kind of background check? I have crippling social anxiety and thinking about this soykaf makes my head spin. This is my greatest fear and it's so real.

>>15971 >"NAME" "ZIPCODE" >"NAME" "ADDRESS" >"NAME" "XXX-XXXX" [phone] >"NAME" "INTERESTS" Do the same where "NAME" is any alias you have used. You're not 'safe' you are just safer. Someone with $5 and your first and last name can get all your info, such as: address, SSN, family members, debt, etc.

>>15971 Depends on how common your name is and where you live. If your name is something like John Smith or another name that's very common even for ethnic names, they'll have to dig through a bunch of bullshit to find you. If you do find any accurate information on say whitepages, go through the process to remove the results. Say you're being stalked by an ex husband or something dramatic and need it taken down. Would probably have to do that every few months or so if you sign up for things often.

>>15972 >any alias you have used Nothing comes up with my name or number and I don't have any aliases. If they can retrieve deleted accounts from a phone in some other way I'm fuarrrked, but if that's the case we're all fuarrrked.

>>15882 I can't view Twitter at all now. Someone who can should take a screencap, if they don't mind. It's sickening and your choice of image shows it well. People were told Communism would dehumanize and surveil them, but that's exactly what Capitalism is doing. I don't use social media, not even the fediverse, but I'm occasionally concerned that I won't be believed and people will think I'm merely hiding things if asked. I think the same thing about phones and how some people may not believe I really don't have one. >>15902 I've seen that before. It's horrifying that business exists at all. Now that I'm reminded of it, I should show it to my family so they understand just how bad things are. They still think you can just walk in and talk to the manager to get a job, and when they see that doesn't work, they still think it works, just not there.

>>15973 My name even with the middle initial is too common, and I personally don't have any social media accounts. Looks like I cannot be found without some crazy invasive paid service.

>>15948 I see a lot of people openly share things that shouldn’t be shared with random people on Twitter with their real name attached all the time. It’s amazing how they’re not concerned about it at all.

>How can people look at this soykaf and still use social media, or at least have it not tide to there irl identity. Because they are naive and being pushed into a culture of media identity obsession.

>>15975 >People were told Communism would dehumanize and surveil them, but that's exactly what Capitalism is doing. Marx was wrong about communism, but dead right about capitalism.

>>17802 >Marx was wrong about communism Now consider the fact that he said almost nothing on communism itself.

>>15882 Not having social media is as much of a red flag as having questionable content on social media.

>>17808 There's a difference between having a derelict Facebook account to keep up appearances and spilling your guts under your real name on twitter. >>16269 >>17769 Twitter has convinced people that using their service will bring them power and influence. This can be true to an extent but people fuarrrk it up by not being willing to hold power without their filthy fuarrrking egos attached to it. It's not enough to have influence, they need that influence to be branded by their birth certificate.

>>15972 only thing that comes up when I do any of these is my linkedin profile.

>>15948 I agree good opsec is necessary in this day and age but we should work to strive towards a world where the average normal person shouldn't have their life ruined because they didn't practice military-grade opsec. She deserves pity, not ridicule.

>>17808 A red flag to who? One could make the point that staying away from such circles is not an entirely negative thing.

>>17835 Cults dont want outsides they cant control. Simple as

>>17835 hahahaha that picture is incredible

>>17821 in a way, i agree with you and the person you're responding to. it's hard to pity these people because this is sort of the world they asked for over our objections. they're the reason i have fuarrrking shadow profiles all over the internet because they let social apps crawl their phone contacts. they're the reason i have to install proprietary datamining garbage for work. still, it would be in everyone's best interest if we put our egos aside and try to offer a way out (if not an actual solution) because more and more people are going to get fuarrrked over like this as things progress. just don't let them thing these things can be solved with regulation alone (can't tell you how many twitter dipshits I see advocating "regulate social media" as if that solves anything).

What if my handle ends up becoming my real name. I guess the worst thing is that my youtube can be linked to my gmail and in a future Orwellian hellscape Google could retro-crime me for satire, soykafposts and just out right though crime.

I haven't used social media in nearly 5 years and now some people are starting to call me a weirdo for it, I fear it might have professional repercussions. fuarrrking hell.

Is it better to just keep a middle point such as having one social media that isn't updated at all, and not post lots of things just to not be seen as a mysterious person?

>>17970 This is basically what I do. Idk if it helps or not.

>>17962 People fear what they don't know. Going into 21st century people are starting to fear one another, and therefore they need to know everything about one another to feel more at ease. Just make a shell of social media and add an old photo of yourself. Don't worry, they already have a shadow profile of you anyways.

>>17962 >I fear it might have professional repercussions You shouldn't. If anyone asks respond with valid and reasonable social media criticism. You will turn out to be a responsible person and that can only boost your professionalism. As for >>17973 >People fear what they don't know. Then maybe put up a personal website with your CV. It should be enough to prove that you are not a creep. It also shows that you are present online, but not necessarily engaging in social media (and for a good reason).

>>15948 People like getting famous, especially that the internet has given the platform for people to become famous in a few seconds. They won't stay hidden because they think exposing themselves and by getting clout, it satisfies their ego. It's unfortunate but that's what the internet is used for now and it's really a part of the internet evolution.

>>15972 I went through and requested removal from every site with my name. Then I reported myself dead to direct mailers of America. Then I filed a police report that my identity was stolen and send the report to lexisnexis stating they needed to exclude me from most of their databases. Finally I googled my family members and requested removal from all the sites they showed up on because I'm sometimes listed as an associate. I deleted my linkedin, facebook, etc. I use a burner phone, twillio voip, and my own collection of email servers to register for things online. I use different firefox containers for different activities. Two years after my effort if you google my very unusual name on google, bing, yandex, or baidu you get nothing but the small number of other people who share my name.

>>17977 >Then maybe put up a personal website with your CV. It should be enough to prove that you are not a creep. I assume most of us who have a "professional life" are tech workers. Having a personal website that you host along with a custom email address probably looks better than having a bunch of social media. The only ones who might find is sketchy are the HR people but you're also screening yourself out from soykafty employers. Other tech people will probably be impressed by your opsec and by the fact you find a little time to maintain a webpage.

>>19062 burner phone may not be a good idea as you'd think. i say stack and age a big pile of sim cards for at least 6 months and you can just switch them on an aosb phone free from google and facebook tracking if you set it up right

>>19062 >I went to the datamining barons and kindly asked them to remove my personal data from their databases and they wholeheartedly agreed to do so Whoa, are you the guy who uses Firefox with "Do Not Track" header?

>>19706 Yes, you will need a phone that can switch it's IMEI, and also change your location and movements every time you switch to new SIM-IMEI pattern.

>>19785 I wonder if there are any laws that protect anybody (on paper) from the simple mechanic that is >Ok I will retain your data for 6 months >But I can sell it """anonymized""" to my Chinese """associate""" who'll store it forever and do whatever with it >That guy is also free to reverse engineer your data with the tools I give him and sell it again with no restrictions I know that it's all meaningless bullshit and there are probably asterisks that buttfuck your rights from the very start, but are there any theoretical restrictions on who your associates can be and how they are supposed to handle your data? I know I have confronted a company for retaining my data wrongfully and they simply did not answer. It's very difficult to find someone knowledgeable about this especially when it's trivial amounts of data.

>>19796 Such laws would be and are as effective as any other law that forbids people from possessing and distributing illegal 1s and 0s. Ways of enforcing them affects the outcome as well. Price availability of digital "goods" have decreased piracy since most people used piracy not for freedom purposes, but as a general way of obtaining things of physical world rarity, or due to their unaffordably high price. Same way a surveillance capitalism model can be rendered unprofitable in federation or decentralized networks (albeit not all of them), because there is no big player to either obtain or sell data to.

>>15966 No

>>15890 The worst part is, simply not partaking of the SM ritual is enough to flag you as an undesirable to most, of nearly equal magnitude of a toxic and vocal person. Better start building your everyday, regular anon profiles now if you want a chance at being hired in the near future. Either that, or be ready to make it alone in the woods.

at this point I'd kind of rather starve than bother with this crap

>>15890 It is quite worrying how instead of needing a government panopticon or repression apparatus (even though it does exist) we have ended up enforcing one ourselves as a society? There is no stasi or government ministry ensuring we all conform, it is simply expected that everyone bares all to everyone and that random members of the public censure those who deviate from the accepted standards. Is this a remnant of puritan religious culture, human nature or something we have been nudged towards by shadowy players?

>>19063 I wonder if this works outside of pure theory. If you go to an employer and only give them a fancy business card website, do they actually care? I know for sure that where I am, not being on FB means you're nuts.

>>19902 >we have ended up enforcing one ourselves as a society I think this is the tradeoff to give everyone a voice. Long ago you'd have A, B, C and D If you were friends with C he would help you be friends with D, and you could kick B into the dirt if he was of no use because all you needed was C and D. People had little to no voice as far as their identity went. It was common that the mentally ill person in the family was locked somewhere and never shown around, or treated with no regard whatsoever. What would be an obnoxious transexual today parading with LGBTQ+ on Twitter would have been beaten into conformity or disowned. People beat their wives. It's not a fabrication, marital violence was a common thing. I doubt that any of these things will be fixed in the future, or that what we're getting is a direct upgrade, but it's a matter of fact that this kind of stuff has been mitigated because people now have a voice and they can connect with strangers. B can now connect with E to denounce what C and D are doing. D needs to answer to F and G. We're shifting from a centralized society to a decentralized one, so to speak, and as a result for the time being we have many little warring tribes, all supervised by a few all-seeing entities who play their game of Risk.

>>19902 >Is this a remnant of puritan religious culture, human nature or something we have been nudged towards by shadowy players? Id wager its a combination of all of it, humans are herd animals and these days so braindead they are almost religious and i no part do i presume human intellect is sophisticated enough or lucky enough to let it go precisely they way it goes.