• lumen@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I don’t like surveillance either, but as it currently stands, you have no expectation of privacy in public.

    So as long as there are surveillance cameras, it would be stupid to forbid any civilian filming in public.

    • gigastasio@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      I think it would be necessary. And if anyone has a problem with it let them bring legal challenges. In fact, let’s run arguments for and against identity and information harvesting by private citizens against private citizens through the courts and see what shakes out. Seeing as how your position is based on what’s legal as opposed to what’s ethical, I bet you’d be in favor of that.

      • lumen@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        7 days ago

        It’s not strange to want a line drawn somewhere regarding public photography. But I just don’t see how that line ever can be drawn in a fair way.

        • gigastasio@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 days ago

          An important distinction that I don’t want to get lost in our discussion is that this isn’t just a camera. It’s a device designed to provide a user with someone’s identity and, by extension, available information about the target without their knowledge or consent. I can instantly think of half a dozen ways that can be used to bring harm to others, some of which meet the legal standards for harassment.

          So taking someone’s picture, and using facial recognition to acquire their identity and entire digital footprint for unspecified use by another private citizen, all in secret…line seems awfully clear to me.