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

What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

neilzone.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 767 posts

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#441

Post by insane_dreamer »

I think the issue is "available to the whole world". "Back in the day" people would take photos or even videos (remember camcorders?) and it wasn't a big deal because well, only that person would have it and maybe show it to some friends or family (or give you a copy).

But now it means archived for the whole world to see, potentially forever. 30 years from now, someone might dig it up.

So it's not so much about the photography (which as someone pointed out, might be allowed in public places), it's about posting the photos/videos into a potentially eternal public archive.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#442

Post by insane_dreamer »

rs186 wrote: post #94

> well, if you don’t want to be in photos published online, don’t be in public spaces That's the correct answer. End of the story. It is our consensus of what "public space" means and one can do with it (which varies depending on where you are) that forms a lot of our social norms and society. It is why hang drying clothes is acceptable/normal in many parts of the world but not in the US. It is why people are expecte…

Strong disagree.

The right to take photos of random people without consent in public spaces, is NOT the same as the right to publish those photos online for the world to see and as a theoretically permanent discoverable archive.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#443

Post by deepsun »

zokier wrote: post #113

It is funny how insular and US centric many of the comments here are. In fact many countries do have legislation requiring consent in many scenarios for photographing or publishing photos. And it turns out that it is not actually very problematic. Wikimedia has some examples, but I'm sure it is not comprehensive: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_...

Not really, other European countries also have the "don't participate if you don't want to be filmed" mentality.

E.g. author says:

> But then I’ve seen the same at (private) conference

I've been to many such conferences, and they all make it very clear that all the photos can be taken and used in advertising by anyone, both in agreements as well as entrance banners. Same as in US.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#444

Post by ThrownOffGame »

GJim wrote: post #413
ThrownOffGame wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weddings held in churches have been public with nobody turned away at the door. Perhaps you are thinking of receptions, where invitations are checked, and accountants are eyeing the attendees accordingly. An impending wedding is usually one of the most publicized events in any city. The banns must be published, typically in a special section of the newspaper. In order to give notice for anyone who may object or know…

> Weddings held in churches have been public with nobody turned away at the door. Most ordinary weddings *are* invitation only in Blighty. Both church weddings and secular weddings held at registry offices, town halls and the like.

You may need to define your terms more precisely.

By “Blighty” are you referring to Great Britain, or a town in NSW, population 326? That seems to be a vast difference!

And I am at a loss to imagine security guards checking invitations at a church door and giving heave-ho to the unworthy. What particular denominations have you polled on this? How many different types of ceremonies have you crashed?

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#445

Post by procaryote »

> I could, I suppose, ask each person that I see with a camera “would you mind not including me in anything you upload, please?”. And, since everyone with whom I’ve spoken at games, so far anyway, has been perfectly pleasant and friendly, I’d be hopeful that they would at least consider my request. I have not done this.

I've done this several times in various contexts. If you ask in a nice way, it usually works

If you don't ask, it's very unlikely people will have the telepathy needed to understand what you quietly want

For air-soft specifically it is also very feasible to wear a full face mask and become very hard for regular people to recognise.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#446

Post by deepsun »

jen729w wrote: post #11

I get it, but the alternative is what? Get model release forms from anyone in a public space every time you turn your video camera on? Who's to say how much of you I have in the shot? Do you feature? Did you flash by? Are you blurred? Recognisable? I was shooting video of a car park exit last year. (I was trying to prove to the shopping centre owners that it was dangerous.) Mundane footage. Some lady drives out in he…

Filming and publishing is different things though legally.

E.g. you can film public spaces as much as you want, but be careful of what you post to YouTube.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#447

Post by scuff3d »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #385
jedimastert wrote: post #188

Back in my day shakes first there were places where someone could do things that would normally be mildly embarrassing because they were in a supportive community. In this example, it could be playing pretend and possibly saying goofy things or falling over and tripping or getting your butt handed to you by someone half your age or something. When I was young, it would have been playing open mics as a teenager. I was…

It may be an exaggeration but it feels like half the problem with the internet has been this sort of “dunk culture” that’s proliferated in the past 10-15 years. How heinous is it that anybody can gain significant notoriety by just providing a steady supply of innocent people to lambast?

It's definitely not an exaggeration. YouTubers talk about this all the time. The videos that do the best are the ones that are negative.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#448

Post by tiahura »

eterm wrote: post #29

I wonder if it's a generational or cultural difference present in the comments here. I am sympathetic to the author, and I also find video a bit invasive of privacy in a way that photos aren't. I therefore find the (obviously common) attitude that videos are just "something you need to accept" quite alien, but I wonder how much of that attitude is just comments coming from a younger generation that have grown up with…

I think the generational fracture may cut the other way. My impression, consistent with the polls, is that the younger generations are much more willing to embrace authoritarianism when it advances their personal values and interests. They think that the threat of violence from the state to prevent others from forming an opinion of them based on information they don't control is perfectly acceptable. Laissez-faire is passé.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#449

Post by ThrownOffGame »

carlosjobim wrote: post #281
watwut wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The traditional purpose of the wedding was meeting and joining of families. The "as many people as possible" knowing about it was not a consideration all that much. > They can have a quiet and private ceremony instead if they have stage fright. That would be called "a wedding".

Of course it was a huge consideration, as adultery was taken very seriously. And still is in some parts of the world. > That would be called "a wedding". That would be called a secret wedding, a very popular trope in old romance novels.

Clandestine weddings have presented a huge problem for Church and State authorities at various points in space and time.

A clandestine wedding would often leave significant doubt about the facts of the ritual, the participants, and their actual state of mind. In most places it really is not legal to conduct a clandestine wedding without strict regulation and some sort of documentation, before and after the fact.

No officiant: invalid. No witnesses: invalid. Prior bond: invalid. Duress or coercion: invalid. These are all really, really important reasons for public ceremonies attended by, essentially, randos off the street.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#450

Post by gms7777 »

GJim wrote: post #413
ThrownOffGame wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weddings held in churches have been public with nobody turned away at the door. Perhaps you are thinking of receptions, where invitations are checked, and accountants are eyeing the attendees accordingly. An impending wedding is usually one of the most publicized events in any city. The banns must be published, typically in a special section of the newspaper. In order to give notice for anyone who may object or know…

> Weddings held in churches have been public with nobody turned away at the door. Most ordinary weddings *are* invitation only in Blighty. Both church weddings and secular weddings held at registry offices, town halls and the like.

In the US this is generally true as well. It’s not that there will be security at the door checking invitations, but it’s be very rude to show up to a wedding ceremony you weren’t invited to.
Post reply on HN