721–730 of 767 posts
“Burning Man’s number one rule of etiquette for photography is Ask First — you should get permission before taking somebody’s photo.”
https://burningman.org/about/about-us/press-media/photo-guid...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment is confused as to you believing that people would want to come to events with strange rules and not follow those rules. What happens in real life is that people decline to go to those events. Everybody knows how to behave at a wedding and what is proper conduct. > Are you genuinely suggesting that there is a basic social rule that says no other rules can be impressed on guests at an event? Absolutely, in…
> It seems you are trying to say "You're not welcome here!" to people who already declined an invite? These things are not mutually exclusive. If you don’t want to abide by the rules, you are not welcome and you should decline. Perhaps the organizer isn’t aware of your preference and your declining helps inform them. If they prefer your presence more than they like their silly rules, they might change them. Deciding…
It's really not about this. Many (most?) people don't want to go to events where the hosts are acting weird against their guests. When it comes to weddings, it's not unusual that you haven't seen the people for several years. And in that time people change.
> Deciding to attend a social gathering where you intentionally ignore the rules that you don’t like is narcissistic and rude behavior.
That's why I've said now about fourteen times here now, that people are going to decline an invite to events with strange "rules". For an adult the normal thing is that events you are invited to do not have any rules at all, because everybody already knows exactly what is appropriate. So real people have a low tolerance for those kind of things. If you're looking for "narcissistic", then maybe look at those people inventing strange rules for what is supposed to be their friends and family?
Maybe it is because HN is a forum for people who work in very corporate settings and are accustomed to having to follow a lot of silly rules without the option to decline?
> I occasionally see people saying “well, if you don’t want to be in photos published online, don’t be in public spaces”. > This is nonsense, for a number of reasons. Clearly, one should be able to exist in society, including going outside one’s own home, without needing to accept this kind of thing. Sorry, that's not clear to me at all. If you're going to accuse other people of "nonsense", you should probably avoid…
Agreed. Was going to post the same thing. It’s very much a debatable position.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was really thinking of imposing a framework where people know someones preference even when looking at the videos later. I would be fine even if there is no fine, if someone found me on one of your photos and say - look a lanyard, what a jerk for putting that online, without any additional consequence. EU came into my mind because of the existing GDPR and as a platform where this could be propagated. No I would gen…
> if someone found me on one of your photos and say - look a lanyard, what a jerk for putting that online, without any additional consequence You can wear a lanyard today!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The people making them consider suicide are the people snapping creepy shots of them and posting it online. This isnt rocket science guys, why are we all acting stupid.
Do other apes want to kill themselves when their photos with no clothes on are taken? If not then it's some kind of sick culture that makes humans think in this manner. Fix that. It will need to get fixed eventually because technology won't go back. It will go forward faster and faster. Even the richest man on earth's (one of them) solution to related problems is a tall hedge around his property that he gets fined fo…
Again, let's stop playing stupid. And, while we're at it, let's stop suggesting "solutions" that we know we can't implement.
There's a very simple solution we can do right now: don't take naked pictures of people.
Just because you possess a device that records images doesn't automatically give you the right to record/post/upload images of me without my express consent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do other apes want to kill themselves when their photos with no clothes on are taken? If not then it's some kind of sick culture that makes humans think in this manner. Fix that. It will need to get fixed eventually because technology won't go back. It will go forward faster and faster. Even the richest man on earth's (one of them) solution to related problems is a tall hedge around his property that he gets fined fo…
Fix... The patriachy? You want me to fix the patriarchy? Again, let's stop playing stupid. And, while we're at it, let's stop suggesting "solutions" that we know we can't implement. There's a very simple solution we can do right now: don't take naked pictures of people .
Sure. Also sexism, puritanism, security through obscurity and abrahamic religions while you are at it. It's long overdue.
> There's a very simple solution we can do right now: don't take naked pictures of people.
That's a very temporary solution since in a very near future everybody will have their pictures taken all the time and not necessarily in the wavelengths that stop at clothing for one simple reason, technology exists.
Don't worry, you don't really have to fix anything. Just peacefully die and let the next generation grow up without your cultural burden. It's also a temporary solution but feasible for now since death is still a thing people do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone finding it rude would find themselves not only on the "formerly invited and definitely not welcome" list. But also on the "good riddance, it was nice having known you once" list. People with such little respect for boundaries are just not welcome in my life.
That person might be close family, and many folks aren't as ready to go full no-contact with their mother's sister or whomever it might be.
I - for example - ditched every contact to my aunt after she accused my SO of being just a gold digger. At my dad's (her brother's) funeral. So no - I don't care for blood. I care for being a decent human being and treating everybody with the respect they deserve, as long as the reciprocate. If not, I treat them with the interpersonal equivalent of a killfile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Historically at least, it's not that weddings are in public places, but that they're inherently a performance for the community. Like the reason for having a wedding is to make a commitment publicly in front of your friends and family. That doesn't mean it needs to be open to all who want to wander in, but it's strange to think of it as a secret event. I feel like it's pretty strange (and mildly rude) to insist no on…
> but it's strange to think of it as a secret event. Not sure why you're using the word "secret" there? Something being not-public (ie invitation only) doesn't mean it's secret or hidden. It just means it's not public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
> we both know "no-recording" airsoft events are extremely unlikely to exist Let's assume it's true. What does it mean? That pretending to ruthlessly murder people while not being recorded is a niche kink and society doesn't owe this guy any special accomodations. Thanks to the internet, which publishing prowess he abhors, I'm sure, this guy will still be able to find group of fellow degenerates so he can have fun wi…