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

651–660 of 767 posts

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

#651

Post by taylorius »

carlosjobim wrote: post #272
justinclift wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A wedding is one of the most fundamentally public events that have ever existed. Not sure why you think that? Although weddings can be in public places, they don't have to be and it's quite common for only invited guests (ie not the public) to be present.

It's still a public event even if everyone is not invited. English lacks the word to differentiate between "public" as "no secret, out in the open" and "public" as in "free for all and gratis". In this case we're talking about a public wedding as opposed to a secret wedding. Thus: A normal wedding with a normal amount of invited guests is one of the most non-secret events to exist. Asking for no photos is like partic…

English lacks the word to differentiate between "public" as "no secret, out in the open" and "public" as in "free for all and gratis".

Try using a pair of words. Publicly announced vs publicly accessible.

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

#652

Post by MatthiasPortzel »

Aurornis wrote: post #375
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…

> 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? I find it interesting how the winds have changed on this topic. 5-10 years ago it was a hot topic in online tech spaces (HN, Reddit, Slashdot and adjacent sites) about preserving your rights to take photos and videos in public spaces. I can understand some people preferring not to b…

Here’s an article from 20 years ago on the subject, to support your memory:

=> https://web.archive.org/web/20040611150802/http://villagevoi...

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

#653

Post by physicsguy »

jonny_eh wrote: post #649
physicsguy wrote: post #296

The thing that I find more frustrating than anything is photos of children. I'm not so bothered about myself. I have a young child - he's two and a half. Most people are considerate and ask if it's OK to take a photo - and I generally say yes if it's friends - but we were at a wedding recently and a staff member, total stranger, at the venue was laughing at him running around and asked if they could take a picture, a…

Does stroppy mean angry where you're from? Where's that?

I’m from the UK

It does yes but more like in a bad mood. A teenager who is rolling their eyes and making a comment because they’ve been asked not to do something could be described as having a strop.

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

#654

Post by matt-p »

It's really interesting that the big objection is really about sharing the resultant video (widely).

I actually feel the same, I don't really mind if I'm at the gym and in the back of a video someone's taking of themselves to review later to take notes on their form. I actually do kind of care if it gets posted to YouTube and now 100,000 people have seen me covered in sweat or struggling with something or whatever. It's something that's technically 'illegal' in a private space here in the UK, so why do we all just accept/allow it anyway? YouTube or Instagram could easily work out if the video was taken indoors and show a 'are you sure' message.

Just a thought. It's not that big a deal, of course, though to some people it might be (for good reasons).

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

#655

Post by nerdsniper »

kjksf wrote: post #410
webstrand wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under US federal law one-party consent requires that you actually be a party to the conversation. This is why most security cameras do not record audio. If you're wandering around livestreaming and picking up conversations you're not a participant in, it's a violation of federal wiretapping laws.

You're so obviously wrong. I watched multiple videos from Portland ICE protest, multiple videos of ICE arresting people, all with audio. Half the people at protests are recording. If you were right all that would be illegal. The magic word is: "reasonable expectation of privacy". If you're in public, like in streets, in the mall etc. you don't have reasonable expectation of privacy. You can be recorded, with audio, a…

> If you're in public, like in streets, in the mall etc. you don't have reasonable expectation of privacy. You can be recorded, with audio, and it's legal.

Just a note because I myself made the same argument very loudly 1-3 weeks ago...and was informed some states have different laws than I expected. Massachusetts, in particular.

(Note that MA limits clandestine recording, not the obvious recording in TFA blog about airsoft -- and it has been neither upheld nor overturned by SCOTUS)

https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/massachusetts-recording-law

>>> Massachusetts makes it a crime to secretly record a conversation, whether the conversation is in-person or taking place by telephone or another medium. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99. Accordingly, if you are operating in Massachusetts, you should always inform all parties to a telephone call or conversation that you are recording, unless it is absolutely clear to everyone involved that you are recording (i.e., the recording is not "secret"). Under Massachusetts's wiretapping law, if a party to a conversation is aware that you are recording and does not want to be recorded, it is up to that person to leave the conversation.

>>> This law applies to secret video recording when sound is captured. In a 2007 case, a political activist was convicted of violating the wiretapping statute by secretly recording video of a Boston University police sergeant during a political protest in 2006. The activist was shooting footage of the protest when police ordered him to stop and then arrested him for continuing to operate the camera while hiding it in his coat. As part of the sentencing, the court ordered the defendant to remove the footage from the Internet. From this case, it appears that you can violate the statute by secretly recording, even when you are in a public place.

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

#656

Post by fourseventy »

soiltype wrote: post #606
scotty79 wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the solution. You don't want to be recorded? Attend "no-recording" event. If there are no such events, tough luck. Market is not obligated to serve your particular needs. If you thing enough people care, organize it yourself.

This comment doesn't engage with the topic at all - you've just used "the free market" as a pass to avoid any meaningful discussion of privacy, consent, and social contracts in the digital age. If your "solution" is literally "tough luck" (we both know "no-recording" airsoft events are extremely unlikely to exist) - what has this added to the conversation?

Your comment doesn't engage with the topic at all either bro

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

#657

Post by johannes1234321 »

ThrownOffGame wrote: post #444
GJim wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

> And I am at a loss to imagine security guards checking invitations at a church door and giving heave-ho to the unworthy.

Especially with churches in most cases nobody will be shown the door especially as in (Christian) church tradition the wedding is before God and the community, which traditionally is the village. Nonetheless many cultures will see it as somewhat private. Especially the reception or a non-church ceremony.

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

#658

Post by aunty_helen »

berkes wrote: post #461
aunty_helen wrote: post #411

I had this when I rode with a motorbike group. It was a loose collection of people that rode a specific route on the weekend. I only went a few times, but it was obvious the people with the cameras were looking for interesting content and drama. I cut an open corner and ended up in the highlight reel as some example of what not to do. Even though everyone there was 50% over the speed limit and riding “dangerously” in…

We, a group of people living on a street where we get a lot of dangerous motorbikers passing our homes, started collecting these video's recently. Our goal is to get the roads closed for motorbikes, place bike-repelling infrastructure and to have police involved in the many cases of one-sided accidents. For that we need to convince local governments that motorbikes are misbehaving. So we now sift through instagram, y…

I sympathise with this, people who are endangering others deserve consequences of the law. I live in a city near a straight road and often hear bikes step through 2-3 gears at night. I know how fast that is and it’s dangerous.

One of the reasons I stopped riding with this group was a few people there didn’t have a strong will to live and so adrenaline and confrontation was what they were looking for.

The specific route I mentioned though is 50km outside of the nearest city, through a wasteland and ridden at times to minimise traffic getting in the way. The best time was 6pm on a Tuesday night where you’d be lucky to pass anyone.

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

#659

Post by elric »

Ekaros wrote: post #39

I think conversation gets more telling if you include some more protected groups like children. And then more slightly more intimate places, like say pools or beaches and expand it to proper zoom and telephoto lenses. Is there still in those case no expectation of privacy? Where exactly is the line? Maybe changing rooms and toilets are not public places anymore... But is the line really that clear?

I encounter people taking pictures, making video calls, and recording insta/tiktok/whatever videos in the gym changing room all the god damned time. I keep telling people to stop, but not once has anyone responded with "oh sorry". A belligerent "why?" is the most polite response I've received.

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

#660

Post by TRiG_Ireland »

sarchertech wrote: post #558
physicsguy wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This gets asked at basically every wedding I've been to in the UK i.e. there is a professional photographer, please don't take photos of the bride and groom in the church and it still gets ignored. At my own wedding, one of the guests (not even someone invited to the whole day, just a neighbour of my wife's parents who knew her growing up) is leaning out of the aisle with their phone taking photos ruining a load of p…

I noticed you said “the whole day” I went a wedding once where the bride was from the UK. They said it was a “British style” wedding. It was almost exactly like an American wedding except that everything lasted twice as long (cocktail hour was 2 hours etc…). I could never find out if this was a common thing in the UK or not.

I believe that it's uncommon in the USA to invite people to part of a wedding, but it's common in the UK. "Not someone invited to the whole day" implies a second-tier guest, who's been invited to the ceremony and the after-party, but not to the meal.

The ceremony is technically open to the public in any case, usually.

Post reply on HN