681–690 of 767 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One day somebody is going to run for President who had an extensively online youth and it's going to be wild.
Well J D Vance has all those awkward pics of him as a young fellow and it hasn't hurt him. He made VP coming from nowhere.
> 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.
And let me know one single instance where someone gets sued for posting a photo of someone appearing in public space in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend that was going to deliver a child told us about a dad-to-be that was going around the maternity ward making videos ...
That's a good recipe for getting a black eye. The mother-to-be tends to be pretty much confined to her immediate affairs, but the partner… (I'm sure everyone is different, but I've been there as the father-to-be, and I would have made a good effort of turning that live-stream into a live-colonoscopy.)
> 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…
Huh? Hanging clothes is absolutely accepted in the US. I have a clothesline.
> 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…
Not the end of the story. Photographing where people do not expect strong assurances of privacy is complex to enforce. Try photographing inside a stadium, at the Olympics, etc. Others around you might be photographing, but security might ask you to stop or leave.
In case that's still not clear, you need a ticket to enter a stadium, unlike your local public parks or public library, or, like, streets.
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_...
Mix that with the lack of general shame for this stuff and you have this weird state of affairs where you don't want to do anything slightly risky. Nothing silly, nothing that can cause you to be looked over on job apps, nothing that you enjoy by yourself but others find "weird".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not a generational thing at all. There were plenty of TV shows centred around candid camera / security camera / home video footage back in the 1980s/1990s well before digital cameras or the internet was ubiquitous.
Or look at newsreels, or news reports from ... any time up to the 2010s. Obviously people's faces weren't blurred before we had the tech to do it. It's some entirely new, modern prissiness. It screws up the documenting of social history when you can't see any faces. There's been an internet fad for restored film of street scenes from 1915 or so: imagine if all the faces were blurred to protect the privacy of people w…
This situation compounded very gradually. In the late 90s, it was extremely common for young people to make each other laugh by doing dumb things in public (sometimes knowingly on camera) that they’d never expect to be seen by a wide audience. Then in the early 00s, the experience of going a little viral (just within your college Facebook community, before the word ‘viral’ was a thing) was actually pretty common and this started to make people just a little more guarded about being photographed. So those who got filmed doing something drunk/dumb would be more likely to go more viral, as it was now a rarer sight. And so on. It’s a recursive effect that made us all duller and more image-conscious and anxious in public. This process took a couple of decades to end up where we are now. It’s not just some new modern prissiness.
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_...
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…
Go to a restaurant with friends or family for dinner - someone has to request the waiter to take a photo of all our faces stuffed with food, can't even have a meal without modeling for stupid photos.
Go to any event - we have to take photos, we have to pose for photos. Back when meetup.com was a thing, every event people were more interested in taking photos than having meaningful conversations.
Go to any tourist place - flashes everywhere, photos everywhere. I used to live in Manhattan, you can't walk 10 feet without some tourist group posing for photos. You have grit your teeth and wait for their photo session to finish, or feel bad for interrupting it.
Couple of years ago (I forgot exactly when) I noticed the self checkout kiosks at WholeFoods had video cameras. I can't even buy half a pound of tomatoes without being on someone's camera/database. As if WholeFoods is some top secret nuclear facility...What crime am I gonna commit there? Steal onions?
And on and on and on...
Who even looks at these stupid photos anyway? Do we really need to document what we ate for breakfast along with our faces, as if we ate some exotic fruit that is only available once every 25 years? It is the same shitty toast and crappy coffee
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.
This makes perfect sense. I don't want to take anyone's photo (even those people I know very well, like family and friends) without their consent. Same way, I don't want anyone taking my photo either, and most certainly don't want anyone posting them online where it is gonna stay there forever.
We are just plain stupid, as a society