Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent • Hacker News Board

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#541

Post by squarefoot » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

nonameking2026 wrote: post #438

winternett wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much of the content I see now on TikTok and other apps is totally staged, and quite often poorly staged at that. It would be interesting to know who funds the production of many of the videos, because there's obviously an advertising scheme or some sort of moneymaking ploy behind a lot of it. I think things really took off with the people who were making "gold-digger" videos, where a guy tries to talk to a girl an…

It's an industry - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvqa8dsBtno Fake cooking videos en masse. I think it's time to give people the option of opting out of filming, carry a small rfid/chip or s-t and then you can't be filmed - built in AI blur :)

A QR code carrying a universally standardized and unskippable instruction to "blur whoever wears it" should suffice. "Permission levels" could also be added so that for example I can choose to be filmed/photographed only by family and/or friends but not strangers. It doesn't seem out of reach with current technology.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#542

Post by gonehome » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #483

drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

What a weird psychological fragility. If a stranger leaves me holding their trash I shrug and shove it in a garbage bin.

It's worse when that stranger is also surreptitiously filming you to paste it all over the net as evidence of how 'kind' they were to you.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#543

Post by googlryas » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:39 PM UTC

kleer001 wrote: post #446

sbf501 wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is even older than Jesus. I also am not religious, but there is a hebrew tradition of Tzedakah mentioned by another poster below, but here are the levels instead of a link., Maimonides defines eight levels in giving charity (tzedakah), each one higher than the preceding one. On an ascending level, they are as follows: 8. When donations are given grudgingly. 7. When one gives less than he should, but does so chee…

Yea, I wonder what it would be like to live in a culture, in a civilization, without usury. I think it'd be pretty nice. Also, isn't most important stuff older than Jesus? Like, he's a bit of a best-of compilation, right? Not to denigrate the story, I'm a big fan.

It's out there - look up "Islamic finance" (or Islamic banking)

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#544

Post by rad88 » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:39 PM UTC

pwdisswordfish9 wrote: post #443

drcongo wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small thing, "moot" not "mute".

Well, it’s not like she’s been meaningfully given a voice…

My guess is you don't know this woman or even live on the same continent as her? This is a thread of 500 comments from strangers, more or less unanimously condemning the tiktok media culture that led to her abuse. It's possible most people here know more about the incident and how it affected her than what happened this week in Ukraine.

> Maree gave her consent to publish the video with this article

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-14/tiktok-video-maree-me...

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#545

Post by goodpoint » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:43 PM UTC

goodpoint wrote: post #209

phpisthebest wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.

Most people now use "virtue signaling" as as insult to quickly dismiss any person expressing ethical concerns.

The silent downvotes only prove my point.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#546

Post by decremental » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:45 PM UTC

notriddle wrote: post #532

F_J_H wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joking aside, Something I find fascinating about ancient wisdom literature that has been in circulation for centuries - honed and refined generation after generation, is how succinctly key concepts are boiled down in ways that can be easily grasped/remembered. (In this case, avoiding conflict of interest/segregation of duties.)

1. Selection bias. There's a lot of stuff in the Bible that is total gibberish to modern ears. 2. Inversed cause and effect. Even if you aren't Christian, there's a good chance that the morals you were taught as a child are influenced by it. The Christian Bible is literally the world's best selling book.

Going further it's in fact the very foundation of the morality of western civilization. It's little wonder why it's constantly under attack and diminished.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#547

Post by debrice » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:46 PM UTC

I’m puzzled why he didn’t take the video down while he acknowledged that Maree is upsets about it, instead asking that she contacts him and requests the video to be taken down.

The strange perspective and sense of entitlement of a successful TikTok influencer…

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#548

Post by Hnrobert42 » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:48 PM UTC

gonzo41 wrote: post #300

TrueGeek wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even The Guardian couldn't help but link to the TikTok channel, point out when it was posted so you could find it easier, and post a screenshot of the video with the woman in it even though it's an article all about how she didn't want to be on camera. They're going to get tons of views!

'Journalists' dont' give a shit about anyone. Her concerns are mute, now they guardian gets to talk about the meta issue. The tiktok was exploitative, the guardian article was likewise exploitative. They could have not linked to the channel and also just written a description of the tiktok. Choices were may, all of them to exploit that women directly or indirectly by piling onto the hype.

We don’t know what journalists feel or care about. We are not mind readers. For that matter, journalists described hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#549

Post by vel0city » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:48 PM UTC

curryberto wrote: post #486

vel0city wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting that any somewhat mainstream protestant church emphasizes that its followers are worthy. I'm just wondering about literally that line being said before they eat the bread and drink the wine.

The theology of the eucharist/communion is definitely different in protestant churches. I've never been to a protestant church where they believe you receive a sort of saving grace from consuming the host - though there is agreement it is pleasing to God to do it. In the Catholic church they definitely believe you receive some sort of grace. What "kind" of grace is something I still haven't wrapped my head around.

As someone who was a practicing catholic for over half my life, its still not exactly clear.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#550

Post by wizofaus » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 9:48 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #448

winternett wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much of the content I see now on TikTok and other apps is totally staged, and quite often poorly staged at that. It would be interesting to know who funds the production of many of the videos, because there's obviously an advertising scheme or some sort of moneymaking ploy behind a lot of it. I think things really took off with the people who were making "gold-digger" videos, where a guy tries to talk to a girl an…

>but there's never disclaimer that the video is staged or a skit. This is where working in the entertainment industry has jaded me a bit. By default, I assume that if it captured on camera, it has been planned/staged/etc for the explicit purpose of being shown to people. With social media, I think it has been turned up to an 11 as everyone is trying to become social media famous. It takes a bit of convincing for me t…

"By default, I assume that if it captured on camera, it has been planned/staged/etc for the explicit purpose of being shown to people" - I'm genuinely curious, you'd include much of the war footage that's come out of Ukraine recently? I've no doubt a certain amount of it is "stage managed" and carefully edited to come across on TV as strikingly as possible, but to imply that most of it (including secret-filmed footage of POWs being marched off and later shots of their bodies etc.) is staged for the explicit purpose of being shown is a big claim.

(Technically your initial claim is almost tautological, but I assume you meant "shown for purposes other to genuinely convey information about the real world")