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

521–530 of 767 posts

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

#521

Post by detaro »

al_borland wrote: post #516
lynx97 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am assuming you have no good alternatives regarding your gym? Because if you feel uncomfortable with the behaviour of the owners, you should really vote with your wallet.

I don’t go there anymore. The owner has been texting me on and off to try and get me to go back. I’ve been looking for other options, but am having trouble finding one that looks decent for me. It’s a bit of a paradox. When I’m looking for a gym, I find pictures incredibly helpful, but I don’t want them taken of me as a member there.

Most gyms it shouldn't be that hard to take useful pictures without people in them though? Do pictures of classes add anything?

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

#522

Post by tonymet »

SkyBelow wrote: post #517
tonymet wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP offers a reasonable idea of wearing a lanyard or badge to indicate you'd like to be censored out of the final video. that's practical and provides community enforcement -- for example if someone publishes a video with a subject like that, the community can shame them for it.

Shouldn't it be opt in, not opt out? Wear a badge if you are okay being in it. People who aren't wearing it are blurred out or otherwise removed.

that's how I would do it. but we have to start somewhere and maybe zoomers really do enjoy being recorded? who knows?

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

#523

Post by xboxnolifes »

nonethewiser wrote: post #511

>Publishing someone’s photo online, without their consent, without another strong justification, just because they happen to be in view of one’s camera lens, feels wrong to me. Why? I dont ask this dismissively. Im not suggesting he's unjustified. That's just the interesting question to me and the author doesnt explore it. I believe this feeling is a new trend. I dont think people had these qualms, say, 20 years ago.…

Social media is why. 20 years ago social media was not what it is today. The dynamics have changed.

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

#524

Post by op00to »

cthor wrote: post #210
op00to wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The evidence I present is that I have never seen someone complain about someone else filming in public. I’m not sure that the articles position on HN says anything about the majority opinion on a topic, only that it’s of interest.

You must not have looked very far. Here's one example from circa 2011 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iN9E3vJzxk0 People respond to a camera shoved in their face. It's not felt the same as simply being looked at.

I have practiced "street photography" for years, where I purposefully take pictures of people on the street. Sometimes people ask what I'm doing, I tell them, and they say "cool can I see the pictures"? Sometimes I send them a file or whatever. No one's gotten all out of sorts over it.

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

#525

Post by [deleted] »

crazygringo wrote: post #356
callc wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic human decency. Just as the author says: “Publishing someone’s photo online, without their consent, without another strong justification, just because they happen to be in view of one’s camera lens, feels wrong to me.” It doesn’t fall to the legal level, but a social rules level. People who obnoxiously recording people in public, even if 100% legal, and disregard the wishes and conform of others around them dese…

I have no problem with that, but there are a lot of commenters here arguing that it should be enforced at a legal level, rather than a social rules level. For a forum that tends to trend libertarian, I'm genuinely surprised by the level of enthusiasm for using the government to police the photos people take and share of people in public spaces.

[deleted]

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

#526

Post by ghaff »

hdgvhicv wrote: post #287
lenors wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from Gen Z and the idea of being filmed and published online without my consent sounds like a nightmare. It is my belief that it's an invasion of privacy (even in a public space) and questionable from a (cyber)security perspective. In France we got the Droit à l'image (Right to the image) which makes it illegal to post images or videos of people online without their consent, so that may be why that feels very str…

Aside from the Eiffel Tower what actually benefits from that right? In many ways an unenforced right is worse than no right at all.

The Eiffel Tower situation is a somewhat complicated matter. You can (of course) publish a photo of the tower on your social media account. But the nighttime illumination is apparently copyrighted and it's not clear to me if the prohibition about publishing extends beyond commercial purposes anyway.

I agree with your broader point. Recognizable people get their photos published on social media every second of every day and, while someone can probably find an outlier example where someone got prosecuted for doing so, it's incredibly rare at the least--even in countries where it's technically a violation of some law.

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

#527

Post by Wilsoniumite »

I agree a lot with the sentiments here and I think people who want to avoid being filmed should have that right. But, as someone who doesn't mind (and is younger) I suppose I could share my rationalizion for it (as flawed as it may be)

One often mentioned reason is the fear that in some way your likeness will end up in something significant, or viral. That makes sense, it's the most invasive and significant violation. We "risk becoming the side character in someone else's parasocial relationship" as another commentator mentioned. I myself wouldn't want that either, but I derive some comfort from one main observation: virality doesn't scale. A lot of the worries come from the fact that "everyone is filming now", "everything is shared now". That's true, but the likelihood of any of this ever becoming popular or even seen goes down as the volume goes up. That alone is enough for me to not be that worried, at least not by the increased prevalence of public filming/photography.

On the other hand, this does nothing to limit the effect of data harvesting and government espionage, a real worry I might have.

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

#528

Post by rkomorn »

nonethewiser wrote: post #511

>Publishing someone’s photo online, without their consent, without another strong justification, just because they happen to be in view of one’s camera lens, feels wrong to me. Why? I dont ask this dismissively. Im not suggesting he's unjustified. That's just the interesting question to me and the author doesnt explore it. I believe this feeling is a new trend. I dont think people had these qualms, say, 20 years ago.…

For me, the "why" is a mix of:

1- ubiquity: now, virtually everyone's got a device capable of capturing high quality photo/video of you at any time

2- discoverability: social media gives anything the potential to go viral which might put you in the spotlight or limelight, and the frequency at which things can go viral "enough" is way higher (more platforms, larger follower counts, etc) (this is I assume what you meant by "reach")

3- "content creators" are everywhere: people want to turn anything into something, through all kinds of incentives that were unavailable 20 years ago, so it's a much more active "capture and use it" context

Things just aren't the same as they were 20 years ago.

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

#529

Post by brisky »

Great points. With Meta glasses and other similar gadgets I think manual consent is not enough. There should be a 'protocol' to announce that you don't allow your images to be included in social media. I propose a QR code that would signify that you don't want to filmed. We need to push for legislation allowing (returning) such liberty. After such automated consent is legal it will be up to social media platforms to blur and anonymize individuals with such preferences. Finally we will have a job where AI could be put to good use!

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

#530

Post by Planktonne »

daveoc64 wrote: post #109
octo888 wrote: post #3

We Brits don't speak up enough in general. An e.g. German would have no qualms about going up to the person filming and making their concerns known. That's exactly why it's become normalised Also many people just flip out even about the most reasonable of requests.

>We Brits don't speak up enough in general. They would be wrong to, given that it's legal to take photographs or videos in a public place. There is no expectation of privacy in a public place in the UK.

How do you rationalise being pro-photography in public but anti free speech?
Post reply on HN