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

At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 188 posts

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#151

Post by Dylan16807 »

freehunter wrote: post #93
pavel_lishin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What you're arguing is for blaming the victim. Telling the victim to not automatically respond with disproportionate violence is not "blaming the victim". If he'd said, "if you don't want pictures of your dick on the internet, don't pee at Google I/O," then you might have a point.

Listen to yourself, man! If someone peeked their head under a stall, would it be disproportionate violence to push him back out with your foot? Seriously, sexual harassment is not a light crime. It does serious damage to the victim's mental state. There's no way of knowing if the perpetrator is going to take things further. If you want to state here right now that you feel that violence as a way to stop an ongoing ac…

Pushing them away seems reasonable. Punching them in the face both escalates and doesn't actually get them further away from you.

And if you are seriously worried about someone solely because of peeking then you need to learn how to handle that worry.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#152

Post by jff »

cyanbane wrote: post #61

I am just confused as to why taking off your Glass will not be similar to other common social bathroom courtesies like putting away your cell phone, or utilizing family bathrooms, etc. Once a stigma is in place at the social level, it will work itself out. If not, there is always the direct approach of just asking someone to put it away.

I'm just ducking in to take a leak; removing the glasses would double the time it takes, and the dev pair I tried didn't seem to fold up like regular glasses to slip in a pocket, so what, I'm expected to carry around a Glass purse to stash them in? I'd rather they implemented something to make it very clear when Glass is recording--make the big plastic bit that holds the lens glow red, something like that--so everyone would take the signal that I am not recording them, just happen to be wearing it.

Also, we already have a social convention in place for this. You don't look at, speak to, or otherwise acknowledge other people in the bathroom, except so as to give them appropriate space. Everyone in there is taking care of private functions; if everyone follows the convention, we all get a maximally private experience.

Convention already dictates that you shouldn't be rubbernecking at the other urinals; even talking to someone else while at the urinal gets you labeled as "that guy" among the people I know.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#153

Post by Dylan16807 »

freehunter wrote: post #147
Cushman wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like I was pretty honest in my last paragraph: My sense is that the sort of fear of sexual assault that you're describing is something women I know experience fairly often in public, fully clothed, with witnesses. (And their fear is reasonable, since sexual assault occurs in those same circumstances.) Their reactions vary, but never is preemptive violence on the table, for obvious reasons. Personally, I wouldn…

What I'm not comfortable with is saying "no, women shouldn't feel as frightened as I would" because the two situations are completely different. I'm not talking about how common these situations are, or how commonly violence is the outcome. I'm talking about how I would react in the very specific situation that is being outlined in this specific story. I would urge everyone to reserve violence until it is absolutely…

I can understand using force to prevent someone from touching you inappropriately. But that has the huge caveat that you must have reasonable evidence they are going to touch you inappropriately. Them standing and staring is not good enough.

Punching someone on the train for standing in your way is not reasonable either.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#154

Post by pohl »

michaelrhansen wrote: post #105

The only hope here is that similar to gym rules that do not allow cell phone usage in locker rooms, hopefully we can adopt the policy "Don't be a Glass ass. Remove your glasses before entering restrooms."

Indeed. "Don't be a Glasshole" flows a little better, though.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#155

Post by Cushman »

freehunter wrote: post #147
Cushman wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like I was pretty honest in my last paragraph: My sense is that the sort of fear of sexual assault that you're describing is something women I know experience fairly often in public, fully clothed, with witnesses. (And their fear is reasonable, since sexual assault occurs in those same circumstances.) Their reactions vary, but never is preemptive violence on the table, for obvious reasons. Personally, I wouldn…

What I'm not comfortable with is saying "no, women shouldn't feel as frightened as I would" because the two situations are completely different. I'm not talking about how common these situations are, or how commonly violence is the outcome. I'm talking about how I would react in the very specific situation that is being outlined in this specific story. I would urge everyone to reserve violence until it is absolutely…

If I understand the scenario, and feel free to restate if I've got this wrong, you're talking about being at a public urinal and noticing another man staring lustfully at your junk. This places you in fear of imminent physical violence to which you feel justified responding in kind.

So, there's a general response from men here that this sounds like an absurd overreaction, but I'm not in that camp. If anything I'm trying to defend your point of view. It's just it sounds to me like you're describing a feeling of trapped, threatened vulnerability that is extreme and rare for men, but a daily occurrence for women, that goes something like this:

"Gosh, that man seems visibly interested in me as a sexual object despite the totally inappropriate context, and the fact that I haven't made any advances or invitations whatsoever. Well, I'm sure that's the hard limit of his disregard for social convention.

"Okay, he just told me to smile. Well, I'm sure that's the hard limit."

Now I'll distance myself from the herd here by saying I think men who act like that (a strict superset of men who might stare at your junk in the john) ought to experience some fear of physical violence themselves. My original question to you is whether you intend that to be an implication of your asserting your right to self-defense in this situation, where the consensus seems to be that it is unwarranted. Though perhaps I'm belaboring the point because it seems your answer is no, or at least no contest.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#156

Post by arrrg »

Nrsolis wrote: post #58
arrrg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Violence without immediate danger is never morally ok. It is vile and barbaric.

By whose moral code? Yours? Society lays out the rules by law. And society judges when those rules have been breached. I think people forget that they have to live in a world where people other than themselves might have a different idea of what constitutes an acceptable response to distinctly discouraged behavior. Is a woman who is being filmed naked against her will unjustified if she smacks the guy doing the filmi…

Yes, by mine. I thought this was a pretty uncontroversial view. Self defense and not one millimeter more.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#157

Post by arrrg »

freehunter wrote: post #70
arrrg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Violence without immediate danger is never morally ok. It is vile and barbaric.

You know what's vile and barbaric? Sexual harassment. Just because it's easier to see your broken nose than it is to see how traumatized a victim of sexual harassment is doesn't mean violence is immediately wrong. What you're arguing is for blaming the victim.

Someone who is violent without reason is not just a victim, they are also a perpetrator.

There is no reason to ever be violent if it isn’t absolute necessary to defend oneself.

Ok, maybe pushing someone away can be ok in that moment, however the glee with which people here talk about violence is absolutely vile. Violence is not ok. It is to never ever be used, only in the most dire emergencies.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#158

Post by Dylan16807 »

Nrsolis wrote: post #53
coopdog wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well legally they'd be perfectly within their rights to tape you telling them off. And if you got violent they'd have all the evidence they'd need to press charges, conveniently backed up into the cloud.

See, there is where you are wrong. There are NUMEROUS statutes that prohibit the surreptitious filming of people where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. I think a bathroom qualifies. And I think you'd have a hard time getting a jury to convict someone of punching another guy in the nose for filming them in the bathroom. Honestly, do you think the VERY FACT that he has a camera running at the time he gets pu…

Yes, any kind of initial filming would be illegal. But once there's an argument going, everyone decent, I wouldn't see it as a privacy violation to overtly film the proceedings. I suppose it depends on the exact wording of the law.

Re: At Google Conference, Cameras Even in the Bathroom

#160

Post by nooneelse »

georgemcbay wrote: post #133
hnriot wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly discreet, anyone wearing the dorky glasses will be automatically labeled dork, and when they start winking at things they want to photograph it will just be super creepy.

It is just a matter of time (perhaps it has even happened, I don't follow Glass development much) until there is an app for jailbroken Glass devices that takes photos on an X second timer, no winking required. Whenever cameras and control logic are combined, intervalometer control isn't far behind.

Right, and it can be a smart intervalometer, with a little pop-up, "taking a picture in 5, 4,... (to skip taking a picture this time, tilt your head to the left)". Or, "you seem to still be sitting in that waiting room, skipping the timed picture as per your settings (tilt your head left to make an exception this time)." And "you will soon be arriving at the party on your calendar, increasing rate of auto-pictures and going into silent-running mode for two hours (tilt your head left to cancel)."
Post reply on HN