| ▲ | neya 4 days ago |
| Depends, would you walk around recording everyone with your phone out right onto their faces without their consent? |
|
| ▲ | 0xbadcafebee 4 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| If you're a TikToker, absolutely |
| |
| ▲ | probably_wrong 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm surprised it took this long but two weeks ago I saw my first live streamer at a flea market. He was wearing some type of camera on his head (can't tell which one) and had his phone mounted like a wristwatch to read chat notifications. It was like that old Penny Arcade's strip about Glassholes come to life [1]. He was definitely filming everyone without our consent. [1] https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/06/14/glasshol | | | |
| ▲ | neya 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | TikTokers aren't exactly the gold standards of society nor is being a TikToker a free card to violate people's privacy though. What's to say if someone confronts and requests the TikToker to stop recording them without their permission? | | |
| ▲ | 0xbadcafebee 3 days ago | parent [-] | | They just... don't stop. What're you gonna do, take away the camera, hit them? Then they have great content and can sue you for assault. There's millions of people out there that are filming without consent every single day, for content. | | |
| ▲ | neya 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > What're you gonna do, take away the camera, hit them? A lot of people have done this, because at that point it's consciously making a decision to be an asshole and violating someone's privacy. The laws may not be on the side of the guy who hits the TikToker - and that's what they capitalize on, but morally, the guy throwing the punch would be in the right. It also depends on where you live, I guess. TikTokers don't normally do such stuff in Asia because you can go to the cops and file assault, but when they find out you were being the douche, they will not take any action. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | Ylpertnodi 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Public photography is not a crime. * a negative is: the opportunities to enjoy oneself have sadly diminished...do one 'strange' thing in public, and you're on the web. |
| |
| ▲ | neya 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Public photography isn't a crime, but then again it's very nuanced. If I'm taking a portrait of a park, where people are having picnics, it seems "less targeted", if you know what I mean. Whereas walking with a phone or camera in your hand pointing directly at people's faces feels not really right. The best way to do this would be how Google solved this with street view. Capture your public photos, blur out people's faces - better yet, respect their privacy if someone requests to not film them. Eg. Google Street view will blur out complete homes if you decide to opt out. | | |
| ▲ | mr_toad 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It’s practically impossible to take pictures of a famous monument without having other people in the frame (usually they’re posing for photos themselves). AI can remove them, with varying degrees of success. | | |
| ▲ | TeMPOraL 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Ironically, it would probably be easier for the AI to generate the photo of the monument without the people. I mean, for famous monuments, whatever photo you're about to take, you could find 10 better ones already on-line, taken from the same point and perspective, and uploaded to Flickr or Instagram or wherenot. | | |
| ▲ | acheron 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Weren’t Samsung phones doing something like this? If you tried to take a picture with the moon in it, it would just generate an image of the moon? |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | paxys 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| So smartphone cameras should be banned nationwide depending on whether I personally record people without their consent or not? |
