Hacker News Reader

FTA:

"You know, I can understand that concern. One thing that's important for folks to understand about what we look for is none of the things that the federal constitution lists as protected things, we don't use those. We're not putting out this broad brush stroke of trying to find out all kinds of information about the person that we're not able to use or shouldn't use in the hiring process," Sullivan said.

View on HN

"We would like to have your e-mail password. We promise we won't read the embarrassing ones"

That's what I mean - by that quote you can see they still don't get it. He's talking about "the person" (his words). There is more than one person getting their private information reviewed. And the article says "The requirement raises questions concerning applicants' privacy rights." So the reporter doesn't get it either. It's not just affecting the applicant.

That quote is in reply to: "Another concern the applicant raised was that by providing the City with a Facebook user name and password the City not only has access to the applicant's page but also to the pages belonging to all of the applicant's Facebook "friends.""

I think they get it just fine, they just don't care.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com