101–110 of 207 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> toot sweet Not sure if intentional but just in case: the usual term is "tout de suite"
It might be in the original French, but it’s been anglicised and adopted as an English language term: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/toot-sweet_adv?tl=true
I remember seeing some celebrities in the late 00s / early 10s with IR-emitting sunglasses or accessories to flood the camera sensors of paparazzi and make it harder for photographers to get spyshots of them. Would this approach work for these camera glasses as well, simply flooding them with so much IR spectrum light that their sensors simply can't see you anymore?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Switzerland is quite unusual in that regard. I would imagine most Hacker News users live in places where recording or photography in a public place is not illegal. Your suggestion of violence certainly isn't legal in most places!
I look forward to the social media rage meltdown shorts that widespread adoption of this tech will precipitate. I think I'm kidding. I should be kidding. But I am curious... Question for people who resonate with this: whenever someone is holding their cellphone at an angle that "could be inferred" to be imaging you, how do you feel and think? I grew up on Earth before the cellpocalypse (phone zombies, etc), and went…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I want to record you, you'd never know. https://www.dpreview.com/news/4272574802/omnivision-has-crea... So all the people blathering about camera in public have a moot point. All the whining does is prevent the fairly obvious camera being put into devices. But if someone wants to record you in public otherwise, they will and there's nothing you or any of us can do about it.
The thing is, every beginner lockpicker makes a similar point when they realize how easy most locks are: "what's the point of locking my door if anyone can easily get in anyway?". I think the same answers apply here: because making it harder to be casually recorded sends a clear signal that you don't want it, and now the act of recording goes from being an oversight to a deliberate, sometimes punishable act.
No they don't. I'm a beginner lockpicker and so far I've only been able pick a 2 pin lock once. Have not been able to repeat it. Have not been able to rake any lock open. Lockpicking is much more of a skill than people online give credit. People on the Internet always acting like lockpicking is just as easy as using the key for any old novice.
It is interesting to see the consensus that nobody is enthusiastic about meta Ray-Bans except Zuckerberg. It's creepy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the biggest mobile use case where you don't want to be secretly recorded in public? This was a big concern with the original Google Glass.
If I want to record you, you'd never know. https://www.dpreview.com/news/4272574802/omnivision-has-crea... So all the people blathering about camera in public have a moot point. All the whining does is prevent the fairly obvious camera being put into devices. But if someone wants to record you in public otherwise, they will and there's nothing you or any of us can do about it.
But I don't get sucker punched very often, so it seems like there probably are things that can be done about. Norms, consequences, etc etc. "We live in a society".
Taping over the recording indicator is illegal. Is there any way your device can find the MAC address of the glasses through bluetooth or something and file a lawsuit automatically?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can record in public, but you can’t point cameras at public areas? That seems contradictory Or is it the fact that it’s always recording that makes the difference or something?
The easier way of phrasing it is "you can't record in public, except in certain circumstances". Those certain circumstances just happen to encompass most things reasonable people want to do. In Europe there is very much an expectation of privacy in public. But that expectation is not absolute, it competes with various other rights and public interests. For example you can make street photography without blurred faces…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea of being constantly monitored by a megacorp tracking all my movements wih their swarm of cameras to feed us personalized ads is utterly dystopian indeed. But I think the only valid way yo prevent this will be legislation though, it's not a fight individuals can win on their own.
In the USA, at least, the right to record in public is protected by the First Amendment.
Perhaps a good approach would be to pressure businesses about this. Frankly they probably don’t want pervasive recording of their employees anyway.