Microsoft Anti-Porn Workers Sue Over PTSD (thedailybeast.com) 305
An anonymous reader shares with us a report from The Daily Beast: When former Microsoft employees complained of the horrific pornography and murder films they had to watch for their jobs, the software giant told them to just take more smoke breaks, a new lawsuit alleges. Members of Microsoft's Online Safety Team had "God-like" status, former employees Henry Soto and Greg Blauert allege in a lawsuit filed on Dec. 30. They "could literally view any customer's communications at any time." Specifically, they were asked to screen Microsoft users' communications for child pornography and evidence of other crimes. But Big Brother didn't offer a good health care plan, the Microsoft employees allege. After years of being made to watch the "most twisted" videos on the internet, employees said they suffered severe psychological distress, while the company allegedly refused to provide a specially trained therapist or to pay for therapy. The two former employees and their families are suing for damages from what they describe as permanent psychological injuries, for which they were denied worker's compensation. "Microsoft applies industry-leading, cutting-edge technology to help detect and classify illegal images of child abuse and exploitation that are shared by users on Microsoft Services," a Microsoft spokesperson wrote in an email. "Once verified by a specially trained employee, the company removes the image, reports it to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and bans the users who shared the images from our services. We have put in place robust wellness programs to ensure the employees who handle this material have the resources and support they need." But the former employees allege neglect at Microsoft's hands.
Whither privacy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this how far we've fallen? No more are we concerned with violations of an individual's privacy. Now we are more concerned with the rights of the violators.
Yes, we have fallen this far – especially judging from the responses to your Comment.
There are still droolers that don't get it, and they never will. Even if they are framed – through no fault of their own – for someone else's misdeeds. Nor even if they make a sarcastic remark that is misinterpreted by MS's spies (or the NSA) as somehow law-breaking, and they end up tangled in our lovely criminal court or even penal system.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reason in most western countries that police officers/constables who work on sex-related crimes especially for those that are under the age of 16 has special guidelines they're required to follow. That includes pre and post-operation psychological testing, and can't work in that division longer then 6mo in a 3-4 year period. And almost all places have mandatory counseling that you're required to take afterwards that in itself is usually 6mo-1yr.
Re:Whither privacy? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Whither privacy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Right - just like how secretaries don't have a sexual harassment claim unless the boss locked the exit door before pressuring them into sex. They can always quit!
Re: (Score:3)
Right - just like how secretaries don't have a sexual harassment claim unless the boss locked the exit door before pressuring them into sex. They can always quit!
Was sexual harassment in the job description? Chances are, the folks at MS had at least some clue what they were getting into, even if during the training.
If you are going to have a panty-clutching pearl-waste response to something, at least do it right. That shit above, was a pathetic effort.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it went out the window when you agreed to the TOS you didn't read.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends if they go seeking them out, or if they're responding to reports from users of social sites, forums, etc.
Re:Whither privacy? (Score:4, Insightful)
So you're saying they have an un-seeing procedure when they look at someone's personal and private pictures that turn out to be legal?
Re:Whither privacy? (Score:4, Insightful)
They weren't sent TO Microsoft. They were sent to other users. If I send Joe Blow a letter and YOU open it, it is certainly a privacy violation.
Re:Whither privacy? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I send nude photos of myself to my girlfriend, no-one but her should be able to see them (and vice-versa). I don't give a single FUCK if they want to see it or not. STOP SNOOPING THROUGH MY COMMUNICATIONS YOU FUCKING ASSHOLES.
Luckily, I stopped using Microsoft products entirely years ago and stopped using their OS almost two decades ago.
Re: (Score:2)
You might have stopped using Microsoft, but how certain are you that your recipient's email server isn't hosted by Microsoft?
Re:Whither privacy? (Score:5, Interesting)
dude if you're worried about pictures you send getting flagged as child porn or snuff films, maybe it's you with the problem
You are assuming the pictures came from the sender. If these Microsoft employees get bonuses for finding kiddie porn, like Best Buy empolyees do [slashdot.org], then that is a big incentive to plant evidence.
If you think that only the guilty need to fear a moral panic, you should read up on the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic [wikipedia.org] that gripped American in the 1980s. Thousands of innocent people had their lives destroyed by false accusations. Many of these accusations were financially motivated by psychologists charging high fees to retrieve "repressed memories" of "victims", and politicians trying to advance their careers by "saving" children.
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent up. It's astounding to me how many people are unaware of or deny that the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic in the 80's was a fake scam perpetrated for the benefit of the accusers.
Re: (Score:3)
If you think that only the guilty need to fear a moral panic, you should read up on the Satanic Ritual Abuse panic [wikipedia.org] that gripped American in the 1980s.
Some asshole brandishing a firewarm recently walked into the pizzaria implicated in that #PizzaGate nonsense. He went there determined to "free the children" that he was certain were being held there as sex slaves. None of that would have happened if some dipshits didn't go through Podesta's emails and jump to the conclusion "this guy really likes cheese pizza. Wait, Cheese Pizza. C.P. Child Porn!!!!!"
You mean his GF's sex video? (Score:3, Insightful)
No, he's worried that his private sex video from his girlfriend is viewed by some snotty perv in Microsoft. And apparently he's right. Or he's worried that some business meeting on Skype is viewed by Microsoft employees, which has a name: industrial espionage.
Or he's worried that some Trumpesk figure will have his little list of people he wants to get back at, and Microsoft will do that for him. Or perhaps some politicians is being spied on to influence elections, or some scientist or some judge or or or...
Re: (Score:2)
For espionage to take place you have to use the information you get from listening into a skype call inappropriately (ie. telling someone who can use the information themselves, or otherwise using it yourself). For example, you overhear Verizon and Yahoo setting a price for the takeover deal. You talk to your pal at Google and give them the price, after which Google makes a counter offer for Yahoo. If you hear them setting the price and do nothing with the information, then nothing happens at all (and there
Browsing through smut could be a great job (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Browsing through smut could be a great job (Score:5, Interesting)
What you're talking about doesn't even come close to what those guys are talking about. There's a difference between goatse and tubgirl and watching an infant have sexual acts performed on them. I'd describe it more, but I've tried to block it out my memory, and even now there's some things you just can't unsee. While I'm here, I'd also like to point out that when people equate drawn porn to actual child pornography, I immediately disregard that person's opinion because these people don't know what they are talking about.
Source: I've removed illegal content off 4chan.
PS: I'm not sure if the folks at Microsoft got to appreciate the legal differences between what kinds of depictions of animal torture/murder are and are not legal. It's actually very clearly defined!
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh... the old school is "just pull yourself together" psychiatry, eh?
This isn't about having to look at sick stuff - it's about not being given sufficient mental/emotional support for doing so. Being told to take a smoke break works about as well as telling soldiers just to look away when their pals get limbs blown off. All MS had to/has to do is provide sufficiently qualified and useful counseling/psychiatry to the people they hire to look at this stuff (ie. have the facility and give them paid time to us
Re: (Score:2)
Well it may not be suitable for humans but... (Score:2)
Are these roles time limited? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Similar story with my local police service: people in similar positions are provides both counselling services and mandatory rotation to less exposed investigative areas (~6 months max IIRC).
But (Score:2, Interesting)
But they knew this was the job, right? Why would you take a job and then keep working a job that you can't stomach?
I'd be great for this job, I'm dead on the inside.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's be fair... Sometimes the paycheck and benefits are more important. I remember times when I put up with some serious garbage because I had a wife and kids at home for whom my paycheck was the only thing that paid the mortgage, utilities and kept food on the table. So I put up with it until I could find another job. It was NOT a happy time at work, but the family and I survived without loosing the house or going on welfare.
Let's also be far and point out that most of the time there ARE other options fo
Re: (Score:2)
Willfully obtuse? The claim in the lawsuit isn't "oh, I was unhappy with my job so gimme money".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But they knew this was the job, right? Why would you take a job and then keep working a job that you can't stomach?
Because it would be very bad for evolution if the brain became dysfunctional whenever you experienced something traumatic. It has a range of self-defense mechanisms from immediate responses like adrenaline and emotional shutdown to permanently repressed memories and even split personalities and everything in between. We're able to force ourselves to do things way past the point we get emotionally scarred by it, we bottle it up sometime swithout really realizing it until it bursts.
It's even in the little thi
Re: (Score:2)
Ãoe à Ãoe à Ã(TM)
OK. Now I've been triggered!
In ironic related news... (Score:5, Funny)
They got dinged on their Employee Review for *not* watching porn at work.
I know who could do the job (Score:2)
Some people would absolutely love to do this job.
They already have a nice list of potential candidates, too bad they sent it to the police instead of the HR department.
Funny..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny.... I'd have PTSD from being forced to engage in warrantless surveillance. Splitting hairs because it's "Microsoft's server, since they aren't the feds they can do anything they want" doesn't make it a good thing to do. They are effectively acting as law enforcement and assisting the feds in sidestepping the 4th amendment. The few people they catch doesn't warrant the intrusion on many people who didn't deserve it. Much like the patriot act and butthole searches at airports. Especially if they report "other crimes" which may be victimless.
THAT would give me PTSD. If I wanted to be law enforcement and "catch bad guys" I would have gotten a criminal justice degree and worked in law enforcement where there's proper checks and balances.
Re:Funny..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Private citizens maybe but I think e-mail and cloud storage providers should be treated more as "common carriers" and only respond to legit legal requests for such data rather than enthusiastically embarking on witch hunts to do law enforcement dirty work. What you're sort of advocating would be like the post office reading all of your sealed mail in just in case you might be a pedophile and letting law enforcement know you might be a pothead.
Why shouldn't I expect the same rights that I enjoy (theoretically, not in practice) with telephones and snail mail to carry over into the digital realm? The USPS is govt run in name only these days and is more of a private organization. Would you be cool with UPS searching all of your packages because a computer said there could be pictures of underage titties in there somewhere?
What this boils down to is the government is using private companies to circumvent the constitution using the same old "think of the children" tripe that brought us the drug war with a double-dose of tyranny and it's sickening.
One possible solution to the problem. (Score:2)
Watching Micro Soft porn daily would give me PTSD (Score:2)
I mean, won't everyone have nightmares about shrinkage with constant exposure to these materials?
What is the source of the content? (Score:3)
What was the source of the data that were these workers filtering? Hotmail emails? Office 365 files? Azure storage blobs? I am more interested in this story from the surveillance angle.
There is so much evil in this post it (Score:2)
Surveillance, censorship, repulisive materials, just EW.
I can't even grasp it.
Why? (Score:2)
Why didn't they quit? They knew what they were hired for, then they saw what they saw and still did not quit ... and now they sue?
And MS should just have hired people from 4chan. They don't get PTSD over such stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
re: severe psychological distress (Score:2)
They said -- After years of being made to watch the "most twisted" videos on the internet, employees said they suffered severe psychological distress.
Ok, but who will compensate me for watching Tosh.O all those times in came on late night TV?!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:sucks but as of now someones gotta do it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, those alleged russian videos (if they exist) could reveal what is "acceptable" to the Big Man.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I've never seen any statements by Trump that were negative or derogatory towards LGBT.
I thought that for awhile too, but the selection of Mike Pence to run all domestic policy is about as big a 'fuck you' as you can get to LGBT.
Re: sucks but as of now someones gotta do it (Score:3)
He chose Mike Pence as running mate. A bigot who once made it a criminal offense for gays to apply for marriage licenses. He was not okay with just denying them: he jailed them.
And Trump put him a heartbeat from the presidency.
Re: (Score:3)
This would be an incorrect statement and you're basing it on a bill Pence signed into law. http://www.in.gov/legislative/... [in.gov]
This bill reclassified various criminal offenses, including "providing false information to a clerk of the circuit court" from a Class D to Level 6 felony. It didn't create any new crimes or make the crime in question any harsher.
The "crime" of applying for marriage licenses came about from the fact that the online method of applying for marriage licenses did not permit you to select m
Re: (Score:2)
It's also surprising that Microsoft's HR and legal departments didn't see something like this coming, and take steps to mitigate it. Better counseling, and possibly rotating job duties so that individuals working in this department of the company also
You can look on your computer. MS servers, network (Score:4, Interesting)
> I'm mildly curious as to the nature of the law that allows the company to effectively act as law enforcement
By that you mean "look at what's on their servers"?
You can of course look at see what is on your computer. Similarly, Microsoft can look at what is on their computers.
This was well established in cases in which companies were monitoring their network and their computers, which employees were using for personal use as well as for work. Companies, including ISPs and mail providers, can for example have filters to block users from sending out spam. In this case, Microsoft has decided they don't want child porn and certain other material on their systems, and has taken steps to remove it.
Unfortunately, either policy - allowing companies to access their own systems, or not allowing them to access their systems, has problems. If users cared, standard mail clients and other GUI clients would have made GPG/PGP easier, everyone who cared would have been using encrypted email for the last 20 years and it wouldn't be an issue. For whatever reason, people don't care enough to use a GPG/PGP enabled mail client.
Re: (Score:2)
The summary is terribly written, it doesn't explain, clearly, that Microsoft was looking at material on its own servers. Read it through again, it's VERY misleading in that regard.
TFS reads: "could literally view any customer's communications at any time."
Perhaps it should be clarified, since there is a significant legal difference in rifling through employee data vs. customer data. Employees sign documents and accept that usage of corporate systems and networks gives up almost all semblance of privacy. Customers expect privacy to a certain degree because laws demand it.
And unless Microsoft's hiring practices practically invite criminals and child porn addicts, I highly doubt Microsoft justified an entire team to monitor their employees in this way.
It's company servers, not employee or customer (Score:2)
> Perhaps it should be clarified, since there is a significant legal difference in rifling through employee data vs. customer data.
Legally, in the US, Microsoft is rifling through their own hard drives. Note I'm not suggesting I think this should be the law, I'm stating this *is* the law, as affirmed by many courts over many years. Suppose a hacker, who is neither an employee nor a customer, put malware on the machine. How would Microsoft find malware that bad guys have hidden on their servers? Only b
Re: (Score:2)
> Perhaps it should be clarified, since there is a significant legal difference in rifling through employee data vs. customer data.
Legally, in the US, Microsoft is rifling through their own hard drives. Note I'm not suggesting I think this should be the law, I'm stating this *is* the law, as affirmed by many courts over many years. Suppose a hacker, who is neither an employee nor a customer, put malware on the machine. How would Microsoft find malware that bad guys have hidden on their servers? Only by thoroughly looking through the whole drive. Is Microsoft allowed to look through their own servers, in order to find malware, file corruption, deduplication opportunities, or any other reason they want to look at their own equipment? Yes, under US law. There are good arguments for changing that, and there are good arguments for not changing it.
> Employees sign documents and accept that usage of corporate systems and networks
Customers agree to 20 pages of TOS too. Part of the TOS *informs* the customer that MS already has the right to examine their own equipment. Once you hand a document to a service provider, saying "please put this on your web server for me" or "please take this to Gmail, and ask them to take it to Bob", they may look at what you've handed them before they do anything else with it. That's good when bad guys hand them a malware file, asking MS to distribute it.
Maintaining corporate servers to prevent infections is a far cry from maintaining an entire fucking team to rifle through customer documents and pictures in search of illegal content, essentially acting as an extension of law enforcement while raping privacy laws and destroying Rights protected by the Constitution, so let's drop the bullshit needs-of-a-SysAdmin excuses. I hand my mail to the mailman. Doesn't give them any legal right to read it just because it sits on their truck.
USPS does legally open packages. Moral != legal (Score:2)
> Doesn't give them any legal right to read it just because it sits on their truck
Did you mean "moral right" and accidentally typed "legal right"? The United States Postal Service is in fact authorized by law to open packages at their sole discretion. UPS and Fedex open packages - you can read about it on their web sites.
Because USPS is part of the government, they are constrained by the fourth amendment and therefore don't open first class letters without a warrant (but don't need a warrant for pac
What exception? DMCA safe harbor? (Score:2)
> Hm, what about that exception for technical companies providing "a place" for users and not being responsible what is published on their servers?
I'm not sure what statute you might be referring to. Are you thinking of DMCA safe harbor? DMCA is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Service providers aren't liable for *copyright* violations if they follow the prescribed procedure for handling complaints - and following the prescribed procedure normally involves looking at the material which is the sub
Re: (Score:2)
That is weird in itself but the bad outcome is kind of obvious. It's a company acting like a government but in a half-assed way so of course they are fucking up. They are attempting law enforcement without the "wasteful" extras and finding some reasons why the "waste" was there.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's kind of a strawman argument; the employees aren't saying that nobody should have to do it; they're saying that if management's plans require someone to do it then management should also have a plan for dealing with the mental health consequences.
Re: (Score:3)
just take care of the people that gotta deal with this, i suppose?
It's easier to pretend that it doesn't cause problems. We've had the same problem here, police staff who had to examine pr0n and, in another branch, smoke weed during undercover work, were told they had no basis for a claim because neither pr0n nor weed are harmful to anyone. Which was kinda interesting because the basis for prosecuting people for owning weed was that it was harmful and they needed to be protected from it. Unless they were undercover cops, in which case it wasn't harmful.
Re: sucks but as of now someones gotta do it (Score:2)
I suspect that they have some kind of AI that looks for nudes, and then a person looks it over to judge if it's likely underage or not.
So they probably don't look over every email, but somebody over at Microsoft may have a private pornography stash.
Re: sucks but as of now someones gotta do it (Score:5, Funny)
Great, M$ can fire them for viewing child porn instead of paying for their psych treatment . This is a corporate win-win.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The way laws are written. Yes. However, like law enforcement, there is a certain required intent for charges to be filed. Someone who downloads child porn is not the same as someone who is producing it. Much like decriminalizing marijuana or alcohol. The people who have to sit on a bus and smell the skunk-smelling pot smokers aren't going to be charged with consuming cannabis, but the people who actively seek the drug dealers can be, because the crime is about trafficking for sale. That's what CP is. There
Re: (Score:2)
And the fact that their bosses, when they mentioned their stress, told them to go out to smoke a cigarette or to play a video game to relax, shows a total disregard for the psychological stress those people were subjected to. I think they might easily win this case, depending however on the question whether they were directed to do this kind of
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Get a new job.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I was pretty much done at 2 Girls 1 Cup. Actually, I was done after Goatse. It's bad enough when that kind of shit creeps up on you, but to actually go looking for it... yikes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Ahh, the 2 girls vid. Reasonably hardcore, but certainly not the worst.
In St. Louis there is actually a house cleaning company called, wait for it:
Two Ladies and a Bucket
I laugh every time I see one of their cars about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My arm chair did need the help though. It was deeply depressed and sat in the corner all day.
Re: I don't know how far they had to go (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to remember half the stuff I've seen, and the majority of that was on accident.
If the majority of half of the stuff you've seen was an accident then you are seriously accident prone. Or you are quick to blame accidents, not unlike my son who usually swears some obnoxious act was an accident.
Re:I heard about this in South Park (Score:5, Insightful)
Jurors complain of similar effects from some of the evidence they're provided, and they are only exposed to horrifying images for fairly limited periods of time in most cases. I don't mean to denigrate your experiences, but if you think PTSD is limited to combat, then you don't dick-all about human psychology.
Re:I heard about this in South Park (Score:4, Informative)
This. I was a caregiver to my ALS-stricken wife for three years, and after she passed away, I was diagnosed with PTSD. It's not just combat that's stressful.
Re: (Score:3)
This. I was a caregiver to my ALS-stricken wife for three years, and after she passed away, I was diagnosed with PTSD. It's not just combat that's stressful.
possibly CPTSD? Similar situation here.
Here's an interesting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It's the helplessness and the loneliness that does it, isn't it?
Re: (Score:3)
Oh for chrissakes, PTSD has been around forever. Ever heard of "shell shock"?
Re: (Score:2)
PTSD has become an over-broad term. I don't like that: it should be limited to having an involuntary physiological and psychological response to some stimuli, that interferes with normal life. We need a different term for "I'm reminded of something disturbing I saw once", to distinguish that from "I'm suddenly flooded with adrenaline, reaching for a weapon, trying to find and kill the threat in the milliseconds before it kills me". That kind of conditioned physiological response isn't limited to combat,
Re:I heard about this in South Park (Score:4, Informative)
PTSD has specific diagnostic criteria [brainlinemilitary.org] even including exclusion criteria (e.g. not due to substance abuse). The term isn't overbroad, it's just misused, like "Type A personality", which doesn't mean what people think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
If a court will buy that diagnostic criteria for PTSD, this seems like a cut and dry lawsuit:
Repeated or extreme indirect exposure to aversive details of the event(s), usually in the course of professional duties (e.g., first responders, collecting body parts; professionals repeatedly exposed to details of child abuse). This does not include indirect non-professional exposure through electronic media, television, movies, or pictures.
Re: (Score:2)
PTSD: Post TRAUMATIC Stress Disorder.
I emphasized the relevant word for you, but hey, if you're not traumatized by watching kids get raped for eight hours a day, five days a week, maybe you should get a job with Microsoft?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There is truly some disgusting pornography that will make me gag ...
Try watching CSPAN and get back to me about gagging.
Re:I heard about this in South Park (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I heard about this in South Park (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a difference between sensory unpleasantness - and the depths of human depravity. In normal human beings, it's almost impossible to unsee the latter and it gets inside your head in ways chest thumper he men like yourself can't seem to imagine or grasp. And this isn't the first time this has been reported among image moderators, or (and the individual above comments) among jurors for trials concerning this material.
I know several people with PTSD (not just combat vets but other vets from high stress positions, as well as cops and and emergency room medical professionals). One thing they all have in common is they don't brag about it. Nor do they use it as an excuse to put other people down. (And that's setting aside the idiocy of the false equivalency you set up.)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree its not as serious as what you had to deal with, but I had a similar job screening content and I ended up needing therapy to have a semi-normal life.
Re: (Score:3)
English must not be your first language.
Microsoft has employees that can effectively spy on you for no reason at any time if you're using any of their services.
Much like how Google does it. The reason you can't reach a human is because the humans are too busy spying on you and stealing your data.
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
"They "could literally view any customer's communications at any time.""
Wait. What?
It's always been that way. The deal is free email, etc. accounts for you, and in return the service provider spies on you, selling the details of your personal life to whoever it is that thinks they can profit from having or using it.
It's sold mostly to aggregators – who operate like the credit bureaus – but have few, if any, of those pesky regulations to rein them in when people apply their reports as if they were 100% accurate. You have no recourse if you find an error. Hundreds of companies have a "profile" on you. You have no means to discover who they are. . . or why you didn't get that job promotion that you were in line for. HR bought a copy of your profile from abcdwxyz.com, which is rife with errors, but HR people are stupid, and will read it as truth. Perhaps someone with a similar name has a felony, or worse the report incorrectly states it.
Why Microsoft does not make their spying abundantly clear will hopefully come back to bite them in the ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The billionaires still need us to build machines for them that replace us as servants, only then we will be killed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More power to you. I made the mistake of visiting rotten.com once in the late 90's, and somehow morbid curiosity caused me to spend about 2 hours looking at the worst stuff that I could see on there, I couldn't tear myself away because I couldn't believe what I was seeing. And afterwards I went into a sort of depression for several days. I have never gone back and have actively avoided any situation in which I might see something similar. If I had to watch that stuff on a regular basis I would either, l
Re: (Score:3)
Outsource it to India.
Re: (Score:2)
I have sort of a photographic memory. When I see things of this nature (not specifically) it really sticks in my mind.
I even turn my head when I see a dead cat on the road. The image sticks with me and I don't want it there.
I say outsource the dastardly job to India. We pollute other countries with chemicals, we may as well pollute their minds too (if they'll take the job).
Re: (Score:3)
Emergency room doctors I know are probably all untreated PTSD.
Re: (Score:2)
workers screening content weren't using Linux
Oh, I don't know about that. Having to view "Please install Flash 11.0 to view this content" over and over would probably give me PTSD.
Re: (Score:2)