Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

documentcloud.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 291 posts

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#111

Post by ShadowBanThis01 »

pvarangot wrote: post #102
darth_avocado wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are legitimate reasons for having one party consent legal. My experience with employer harassment has been that it’s extremely hard to prove discriminatory behavior without being able to record without consent.

In California you can record without consent if you have reasons to suspect a crime is going to be committed. It's not the most straightforward thing to get away with and you should work with a lawyer before you do it to be sure it will be accepted as evidence, but you can totally do it.

before you do it*

*before you REVEAL that you did it

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#113

Post by ShadowBanThis01 »

rgmerk wrote: post #86
sneak wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was already true; you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place, and never have. I can legally video and audio record anything I wish in a public park.

As has been pointed out approximately a billion times, technology has made surveillance possible to an extent that was inconceivable back in the founders' time. Before sound recording technology, if there was no-one else around and had a whispered conversation with another person in a public park, I have a reasonable expectation that the conversation is private. Fast forward to, say, 1980. While it's technically poss…

[flagged]

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#114

Post by ShadowBanThis01 »

DougEiffel wrote: post #67
User23 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple approach is to default to single party consent but allow explicit nonconsent. In other words nobody can be recorded without their knowledge, but if they’re informed a recording is being made then remaining in the conversation is consent.

Strongly disagree. There are so many situations in which abusive people (employers, romantic partners, politicians) need to be caught unaware or they won't be caught at all. Obviously there are lines to be drawn when we are talking about the government recording citizens. Warrants are an important check on power for this. But any individual should be able to record (mostly) anything. At the very least, it can save yo…

The best part about the customer-service scenario is that the vast majority now say "this call may be recorded..."

Fine. I'm recording it!

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#115

Post by sillysaurusx »

mcpackieh wrote: post #108
sillysaurusx wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s such a depressing situation. Steve Huffman got caught red handed making up lies about Apollo’s dev for no reason whatsoever. I wish I was exaggerating. Every time I try to describe the event, it ends up sounding like low quality flamebait. Yet it’s a complete description of what happened. He never acknowledged it, either. It was just evil. Usually there are confounding factors or reasons to be on the founder’s s…

Memory can be a funny thing, people repeat stories to themselves to keep memories fresh, but with each retelling the story can shift. "I thought he threatened me but then he clarified that he didn't" could turn into "He seemed to threaten me, but then chickened out when I confronted him" His memory of admitting he made an error could turn into a memory of still feeling threatened but trying to let the Apollo dev save…

Agreed, and I went down that road too.

Unfortunately what sealed it for me was Steve’s response during his followup AMA when someone asked him about the Apollo dev. He said that the dev often said one thing and did another. Christian (the dev) called him out on it and said “I give you permission to name a single time this has happened.” No response.

In other words, Steve doubled down yet again and tried to do the same damn thing after he was caught. Why lie like this?

A developer’s reputation is their most important asset. What Steve did (or tried to do, till the phone conversation proved otherwise) was simply awful.

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#116

Post by murphyslab »

mcpackieh wrote: post #108
sillysaurusx wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s such a depressing situation. Steve Huffman got caught red handed making up lies about Apollo’s dev for no reason whatsoever. I wish I was exaggerating. Every time I try to describe the event, it ends up sounding like low quality flamebait. Yet it’s a complete description of what happened. He never acknowledged it, either. It was just evil. Usually there are confounding factors or reasons to be on the founder’s s…

Memory can be a funny thing, people repeat stories to themselves to keep memories fresh, but with each retelling the story can shift. "I thought he threatened me but then he clarified that he didn't" could turn into "He seemed to threaten me, but then chickened out when I confronted him" His memory of admitting he made an error could turn into a memory of still feeling threatened but trying to let the Apollo dev save…

> All this is to say that Steve Huffman might not be deliberately lying in this instance.

Huffman has had 26+ days to correct the record. He has done nothing to that end. He made a "potentially career-ending" allegation, which hurt the reputation of the developer of Apollo, Christian Selig.

June 8th: Selig released his side of the story, along with messages which were sent to him from a Reddit employee as well as from moderators engaged in a subsequent call with Reddit:

https://web.archive.org/web/20230608172250/https://old.reddi...

June 9th (a full 24 hours later): Huffman had the facts, including the recording, which confirmed their mutual understanding. Huffman could have revised his stance there and then. Instead, Huffman doubled down, effectively reiterating the lie through his scare-quote and instead criticized Selig for acting publicly to defend his reputation against Reddit's internal and external slander:

https://web.archive.org/web/20230616033947/https://old.reddi...

Huffman is the CEO of the Reddit platform and nothing is stopping him from apologizing for making a potentially "potentially career-ending lie" against the developer of Apollo, Christian Selig. He hasn't made a peep on the platform since June 9th.

If it wasn't deliberate, then he's had nearly a month to speak up for the truth. At some point, refusing to correct the record, a lie does become deliberate.

---

Here's TechCrunch's reporting on the situation, if you prefer to hear it from a journalist:

https://techcrunch.com/2023/06/09/reddit-ceo-doubles-down-on...

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#117

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

FlingPoo wrote: post #32

In Canada you can record someone (phone call, in person, etc) if just one party consents to the recording. In other words, if I'm a phone call with someone, even if there are several people on the call, it's NOT illegal for me to record them, as long as I'm a participant in the call. It's called the "one party consent" exception. I have no obligation to ask, or tell the others on the call that I'm recording.

Good luck trying to record a phone call on any modern smartphone. They purposely make it nearly impossible, unless you want to use speakerphone and the analog hole.

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#118

Post by newaccount74 »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #104
bob-09 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did this apply? I admit I haven't been following the drama closely.

It’s such a depressing situation. Steve Huffman got caught red handed making up lies about Apollo’s dev for no reason whatsoever. I wish I was exaggerating. Every time I try to describe the event, it ends up sounding like low quality flamebait. Yet it’s a complete description of what happened. He never acknowledged it, either. It was just evil. Usually there are confounding factors or reasons to be on the founder’s s…

> maybe Huffman literally forgot that he misunderstood the Apollo dev

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the person on the call wasn't Huffman himself. Selig was talking to some Reddit employee, who presumably then told Huffman about the call.

It's possible that the employee who talked to Selig didn't 100% accurately describe what was said in the call (because he didn't have a transcript to check what was said), and then Huffman misunderstood whatever the employee said further to come up with the blackmail accusation.

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#119

Post by withinboredom »

ShadowBanThis01 wrote: post #111
pvarangot wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California you can record without consent if you have reasons to suspect a crime is going to be committed. It's not the most straightforward thing to get away with and you should work with a lawyer before you do it to be sure it will be accepted as evidence, but you can totally do it.

before you do it* *before you REVEAL that you did it

No, before. Don’t give cops freebies.

Re: Ban on recording without consent is unconstitutional, US court rules

#120

Post by [deleted] »

newaccount74 wrote: post #118
sillysaurusx wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s such a depressing situation. Steve Huffman got caught red handed making up lies about Apollo’s dev for no reason whatsoever. I wish I was exaggerating. Every time I try to describe the event, it ends up sounding like low quality flamebait. Yet it’s a complete description of what happened. He never acknowledged it, either. It was just evil. Usually there are confounding factors or reasons to be on the founder’s s…

> maybe Huffman literally forgot that he misunderstood the Apollo dev Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the person on the call wasn't Huffman himself. Selig was talking to some Reddit employee, who presumably then told Huffman about the call. It's possible that the employee who talked to Selig didn't 100% accurately describe what was said in the call (because he didn't have a transcript to check what was said), an…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN