Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

HP's Dunn Stepping Down 301

XJHardware writes "Yahoo news is reporting that Patricia Dunn is stepping down from the chair of HP." From the article: "Hurd will retain his existing positions as chief executive and president and Dunn will remain as a director after she relinquishes the chair on Jan. 18. 'I am taking action to ensure that inappropriate investigative techniques will not be employed again. They have no place in HP,' Hurd said in a statement. Dunn apologized for the techniques used in the company's probe, which included 'pretexting' in which private investigators impersonated board members and journalists to acquire their phone records."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HP's Dunn Stepping Down

Comments Filter:
  • by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <eldavojohn@noSpAM.gmail.com> on Tuesday September 12, 2006 @10:35AM (#16088356) Journal
    This really isn't a surprise if HP wanted to hold together as a company. This damage may be deeper than you think as their Head of Global Operations, Giles Bouchard is leaving [theinquirer.net] by October 31st. It doesn't indicate what his reasons are but he's been working there for two years, why now? Will we see others follow or will Dunn's resignation stop others from jumping ship?
  • Re:Pretexting?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Zephyros ( 966835 ) on Tuesday September 12, 2006 @11:15AM (#16088599)
    Actually, "pretexting" isn't corpspeak, it's legalese. [ftc.gov]
  • Re:Pretexting?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by siriuskase ( 679431 ) on Tuesday September 12, 2006 @11:58AM (#16088934) Homepage Journal
    Here's another government website about "pretexting", dated 2001, so we know the "word" has been around awhile. They also put quotes around "identity theft".

    http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/money/pretextin g/pretexting.htm [gsa.gov]
  • by Fishstick ( 150821 ) on Tuesday September 12, 2006 @12:09PM (#16088992) Journal
    but for some reason the idiodic press thought it was really cool and neat to invent a new word nobody would understand


    close, the idiotic federal government apparently thought it needed an important sounding new word

    There ought to be a law... There is! [ftc.gov]

    Pretexting: Your Personal Information Revealed

    When you think of your own personal assets, chances are your home, car, and savings and investments come to mind. But what about your Social Security number (SSN), telephone records and your bank and credit card account numbers? To people known as "pretexters," that information is a personal asset, too.

    Pretexting is the practice of getting your personal information under false pretenses. Pretexters sell your information to people who may use it to get credit in your name, steal your assets, or to investigate or sue you. Pretexting is against the law.

    How Pretexting Works
    Pretexters use a variety of tactics to get your personal information. For example, a pretexter may call, claim he's from a survey firm, and ask you a few questions. When the pretexter has the information he wants, he uses it to call your financial institution. He pretends to be you or someone with authorized access to your account. He might claim that he's forgotten his checkbook and needs information about his account. In this way, the pretexter may be able to obtain personal information about you such as your SSN, bank and credit card account numbers, information in your credit report, and the existence and size of your savings and investment portfolios.

    Keep in mind that some information about you may be a matter of public record, such as whether you own a home, pay your real estate taxes, or have ever filed for bankruptcy. It is not pretexting for another person to collect this kind of information.

    There Ought to Be a Law -- There Is
    Under federal law -- the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act -- it's illegal for anyone to:

            * use false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or documents to get customer information from a financial institution or directly from a customer of a financial institution.
            * use forged, counterfeit, lost, or stolen documents to get customer information from a financial institution or directly from a customer of a financial institution.
            * ask another person to get someone else's customer information using false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or using false, fictitious or fraudulent documents or forged, counterfeit, lost, or stolen documents.

    The Federal Trade Commission Act also generally prohibits pretexting for sensitive consumer information.


  • Estate tax is a good place to start, but I'm an old school anarchist of the Proudhon variety, and I believe that property is theft. Not personal property, but natural resources. There is no justification for fencing off land and taking away other people's freedom to use it. You have to have labored over something before you have a right to call it your own, and you have to own something before you have a right to keep others from using it. Therefore, no one has any justification in holding natural resources as their own.

    I have not come up with the perfect solution to this dilemma. As Proudhon also, less famously said, property is also the only real protection against tyranny and is inherently anarchistic because it respects no king or lord. I feel their are two choices, Proudhon's idea of communal control of resources or some form of distributarianism. In communal control there is the plus that the process of deciding on how to use resources is democratic, but without a strong constitution and a system of checks and balances this can lead to a tyranny of the majority. With distributarianism, everyone owns their little portion of the means of production, but who arbitrates this ownership, and how do we ensure that the means are distribuited equitably.

    There are many problems with the free market as a system of arbitration. It requires perfect information on the part of all actors to work efficiently. It can not correctly value the costs and benefits of externalities. It does not operate efficiently where the marginal cost of entry into markets is very high (commonly known as a monopoly.) It has no negative feedback cycle to prevent a runaway accumulation of wealth by a few people. The more wealth one has, the easier it is to make more by using your wealth to game the system and ensure their isn't a level playing field. The free market can not think ahead and come up with solutions. It can only say what isn't working, not what might work better, and if what might work better is locked out due to any of the previously mentioned root causes of market failure, we will be stuck with what we have.

    We have a system that expects and rewards selfishness. So much so that even though the majority of people have been shown in modern economic experiments to favor fairness and reciprocity over personal gain, they will act selfishly rather than cooperatively because that is what the system rewards. In fact, the system gives free reign to screw over the naturally cooperative (and this is a large part of the reason behind my "bad luck." I'm too nice and too trusting, and I am not willing to sell out that part of myself just to get ahead.)

    Remember, your friends, relatives and acquantences are not a random sample of the population. You have probably not met the legions of people for whom the system has not worked, despite their best efforts, so it is no stretch for you to think of those people in the abstract sense, and to believe that they had all the opportunities that you did. It's just easier to think that they are where they are because they are lazy than to feel like you have to change the whole system.

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...