I think it can be a general rule without being a concrete one, and is heavily context dependent.

I agree that dash cams are for the most part OK, because for the most part they're recording for safety reasons and evidence in case of accidents. But sitting in a coffee shop as a private citizen, recording everyone that comes in without any particular justification would not really be OK, covertly or overtly. Even though the owner might be doing the same thing for security.

So perhaps "covert recording of other people in public without an accepted, socially justifiable reason, is not OK"

▲

infinite_spin a day ago | parent [-]

I'm not a fan of rules that aren't concrete, especially when the opposition tends to muddy the water and use ad hominems to justify their opinions. Lacking a clear set of rules has never led us to a safer community.

	▲	Nursie a day ago \| parent [-]
		> I'm not a fan of rules that aren't concrete Then you are going to have a hard time in a society filled with other humans, or living with a legal system that takes human complexity and grey areas into account in so many different ways. Outside of a parser or a maths class, rules are rarely that concrete. (Reading your other comments, I am sorry that your experiences have lead you to be so scared going about your day to day life that you think recording every interaction is a necessary thing to do. I'm afraid you're not going to find a lot of people who agree with that, and many who will find the idea very intrusive, though I suspect you're far from the only one in your position. FYI if you go down this route, in some countries it is a legal, not just social, requirement that people be notified that you're recording them, particularly when it comes to audio, see one-party or two-party consent jurisdictions etc, while recording of direct threats may be legit, blanket recording of all interactions or of other people's conversations, as a precautionary measure, may not be)