What an interesting opinion you have, that as long as you break no laws, everyone who doesn’t like your behaviour should be intimidated into not leaving the house for work, medicine, or food.
Comment on Dumb glasses
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
This is so stupid. In public, in most countries you have no right not to be filmed. And you certainly can’t destroy someone else’s device.
I know this post is a joke. But whoever actually has a problem with being filmed in public should stay home.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 8 hours ago
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
The only thing I’m saying is that legal things are legal, even if the consequences might make certain people feel bad. We can all use the public space however we like. I can film secretly on the sidewalk, and you can go grocery shopping, and the next person could shout about his religious beliefs, while the next person could be skateboarding.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 8 hours ago
Well I think you should have more opinions on right and wrong than just what the law tells you to think.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
Sure I do. But everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.
zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 hours ago
If you’re actually puzzled, then you’re a moron. The vast majority of people clearly strongly dislike these things and you’re everywhere in this thread defending them. Are you being paid for your services or do you just love the surveillance state that much?
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
I love my freedoms. And I understand that in order to have your own freedoms, you have to respect other people having theirs. You all seem to think more in line with “freedom for me, but not for thee”. And so far, no one has produced any arguments outside of something based on their feelings.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 hours ago
Yes, they have.
God, I love pretending that your opponents haven’t said things they clearly have because they’re all hidden behind the “see more replies” button.
tjsauce@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
All laws are, in some way, based on feelings that are explainable. We feel murder is bad, so we write laws against it. In places where murder is in some way legal, people fight murderers because they feel they must
We feel surveillance is bad, and we are explaining why we feel that way and why those feelings are valid. We are taking away from you what you see as a right, but we see as a privilege.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 7 hours ago
Just because you don’t have a legal right not to be filmed without your consent doesn’t mean that you don’t have a moral right not to be filmed without your consent
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
Moral rights don’t exist.
tjsauce@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
By “doesn’t exist” you mean that you don’t recognize them, rights only exist because people say so. Recognizing moral rights as more important than legal rights is a popular social value, and happens all around you everyday. It’s not something you can halt or debate, you have to find a way to accept how people are.
gray@lemmy.ml 7 hours ago
I don’t know where you live, but all kinds of filming in public is not in fact legal (and either way it shouldn’t be): firstpost.com/…/japan-ban-upskirting-sex-crime-re…
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
Interesting. Where I live, no such ban exists. Sure it could be a good idea to ban some public filming, but where do you draw the line? I think that’s pretty much impossible to do right now
gray@lemmy.ml 6 hours ago
Up-skirt filming is a good example of an easy line to draw. No filming at public beaches, gyms, pools, changing rooms are also hypothetically easy lines to draw. This isn’t really that complicated.
lumen@feddit.nl 6 hours ago
And what if a whale washes up on the shore? Can the local news agency film that?
NullPointerException@lemmy.ca 8 hours ago
If the camera is hidden, how can you prevent unauthorized filming? Restroom, changing rooms, even schools or children playgrounds, beaches?
Sure, a beach is public, so that authorizes me to film your wife’s butt or your kid? That’s not how it works.
FishFace@piefed.social 7 hours ago
Did you know that on the public beach, I can look at your wife’s butt, or your kids, with my very own eyes? Why does recording it cause you any greater harm than looking with my eyes?
Is it because it involves technology? Is it because it implies I’m too interested in what I see, so it makes you feel uncomfortable?
tjsauce@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Yes because it involves technology, no not because it implies interest. It’s wrong because technology lets you share what you see with others. People trust you to see butts on a beach because they know who exactly can see the butts, andcan personally deal with creeps. I wouldn’t go to a beach where my butt could end up online without my being abletostop it (and I mean a focused shot, not a general beach picture).
FishFace@piefed.social 5 hours ago
The only thing you’ve said is wrong is the sharing of pictures/video.
So, the problem is not the glasses, it’s not taking video with them, it’s sharing that video with others. So maybe chill out about the stuff that isn’t the actual problem.
(Not that the act of sharing is actually going to harm the subject of the video, anyway)
Some countries have the legal principle of “right to one’s own image”, and maybe you want that. But everyone here advocating violence seem to have forgotten how to do democracy.
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
Finally someone who can think. Thank you. None of these people’s arguments so far have been rational.
FishFace@piefed.social 5 hours ago
It’s a Meta product so the vibes are bad, so everything to do with it is wrong and evil. Anyone who says anything contrary to “this is wrong and evil” is wrong and evil.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
Preventing unauthorised filming has been a problem for a long time now, that existed before Meta Ray-Ben did.
If you’re on a public beach, I can film your wife’s butt and your kid and choose to do so either secretly or visibly. I know that this comment will be downvoted to oblivion because people don’t like this fact, but it’s a fact nonetheless.
5ibelius9insterberg@feddit.org 6 hours ago
No it’s not. In Germany for example purposely filming someone’s butt without their consent is considered sexual harassement.
tjsauce@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
It’s also a fact that people can stop you, illegal or not, whether you like it or not. You also act as though a visible, private camera the same as a slealth camera that uploads to a cloud. They are different, and so people will feel different about them.
You seem more focused on trying to get away with stealth recording than if it’s correct to do so, especially when someone argues about the ethics.
ICastFist@programming.dev 6 hours ago
In Brazil, and I suppose most EU countries, every individual has the rights to their own image, as in, I cannot take a picture of you, or one that clearly identifies you, without your consent. If I use it for commercial purposes, I may also need to reach an agreement of some sort with you. Save a few exceptions, such as people walking on the background of a live reporter, a person has rights to ask for their likeness to be removed or blurred.
ieatpwns@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
If you’re holding a camera all good I can see you’re definitely trying to record me. If you’re trying to be slick and record me with your secret little spy glasses I literally couldn’t care less about what’s legal or not.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
Plus, the law doesn’t concern your feelings. It doesn’t matter if you like something or not, if it’s legal, it’s legal.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 hours ago
And legal is not the same as correct
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
No, it’s not the same indeed. If something is “correct” is a (shared) opinion. Another person might disagree and consider other things correct. That’s what freedom looks like.
tjsauce@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
That’s why people are trying to change the law to make these glasses illegal. They are willing to risk the consequences until that point.
You only care about the law protecting you, and are taking advantage of the law not yet protecting others. If you abuse the law, others see no issue with breaking the law to stop you.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
There are cameras everywhere anyways. Don’t act a way you want on film if you’re outside your home, otherwise there’s a chance it’s being recorded and there’s nothing you can do about it 🤷
gigastasio@sh.itjust.works 7 hours ago
Consider the hammer analogy, which says that my right to swing a hammer ends where you begin.
My right to privacy doesn’t end simply because I venture out into public. If I decide to go out, and someone little secret camera sees and records me, and creates a file to the effect of, “This is gigastasio and he was seen crossing 5th and Spruce at 11:32 am today, here’s who he was with and everything known about them available on social media, news reports, and more,” freely accessible to another private citizen with no need for that information, that’s antithetical to the value of respecting and protecting our privacy.
You would not walk up to me, ask my name, and begin searching me while I stood there and watched. If you did I would either ignore you or lie to you, which would be the proper response. If that behavior is wrong, so is secretly collecting someone’s identity, whereabouts, associations and other info. And there are very sound counterarguments against the “nothing to hide” stance that can be better articulated by others than I can do at the moment.
Rather than taking the attitude of “there’s already public surveillance, so more is okay,” I would instead say there’s already surveillance, so resist the temptation to add even more and work to dismantle what currently exists.
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
I don’t like surveillance either, but as it currently stands, you have no expectation of privacy in public.
ieatpwns@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Might not be anything I can do about you recording me but I can act in a way that will make you think twice about recording the next person
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
Yeah? What will you do exactly?
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
No you won’t. I’m might set up a camera on the sidewalk outside your house tomorrow, and there’s nothing you could do about it. Nothing. You’re not in charge.