“Never believe that anti-Semites people like this person are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites people like this person have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
Jean-Paul Sartre
Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 hours ago
Stopped this bullshit for a decade or so
FishFace@piefed.social 7 hours ago
Stop advocating violence against people who might be recording video in public, just because the device doing it is on their face.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 7 hours ago
You actually should advocate for violence against people who are violating your rights
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
What right would be violated here exactly?
FishFace@piefed.social 5 hours ago
You don’t have the right not to be filmed in public. Do you punch every person filming in public? and if you punch someone wearing the glasses, most likely they weren’t even recording.
Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 hours ago
A clear violation of the social contract deserves a swift response. Those glasses come off your face, and onto the pavement.
FishFace@piefed.social 5 hours ago
Who made this social contract? I certainly didn’t. You want to be able to tell everyone else what the social contract is, and assault them if they don’t comply.
Fascist.
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
No they don’t. I might actually go film on the sidewalk just outside your home, and there would be nothing at all you can do about it.
Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
It’s easy to see someone holding up a camera or cell phone making it obvious they are recording. If you don’t want to be recorded, you can just stay the fuck away from them. You can’t avoid cameras/recording devices you can’t see. Fuck meta, and fuck anyone else wearing their garbage, privacy invading glasses.
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 3 hours ago
Really? I routinely keep my phone in my breast pocket whenever I wear a shirt with one, and enough of it sticks out for the camera to see above the top of the pocket. I’d look no different recording or not, let alone it being obvious if I’m doing it. It’d be shaky body-cam style footage, but that’s not the point.
FishFace@piefed.social 5 hours ago
Yeah, it’ll be really hard to spot the giant dorky glasses with the laser beam recording LED.
Of course, in practice you don’t behave differently when you spot someone holding their phone up in the street, because you’re already behaving like you’re being watched because you’re in fucking public.
Onyxonblack@lemmy.zip 6 hours ago
If you wear the video glasses, expect to be fucking punched or worse. Jackass.
FishFace@piefed.social 5 hours ago
I’m not going to wear the video glasses. But if I see someone assaulting someone over some stupid gadget, I’m going to try and help that person. Take your violent fantasies elsewhere, sicko.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
But violence isn’t the answer. And certainly not to people doing legal stuff in public. Wearing a Google Glass in private is different though.
Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 hours ago
All I’m saying is last time this tech trend came around, enough people who had a problem with it took drastic actions that directly affected the popularity of wearing a spycam on your face.
Wouldn’t surprise or upset me if history repeated itself.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
Wouldn’t surprise me either. But it’s a hugely illogical reaction.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Just because its legal doesn’t mean its right
FishFace@piefed.social 7 hours ago
If you think something is wrong then, unless that risk places you at actual risk of harm, you can have that conversation - in public forums, at the ballot box, with your political representatives. If, rather, you want to dictate what you think is right on everyone, with threat of violence then that is something else.
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
See, what’s “right” is a (shared) opinion. One of the consequences of living in a free country is that other people can have their own opinions.
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de 7 hours ago
violence is the answer against people who already commit violence. reducing your sense of privacy and safety is violence. not to mention that this data could be used for ICE’s benefit, which would even add physical violence.
StarvingMartist@sh.itjust.works 6 hours ago
I agreed with you up to this statement, no Karen, getting filmed in public is not violence, even if it’s concealed, Jesus Christ
lumen@feddit.nl 7 hours ago
Filming in public is not a form of violence in and of itself. Have you ever noticed that the public is called “public”, which is the opposite of “private”?
WoodScientist@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
When the law abandons the people, the law of the jungle returns.
entropiclyclaude@lemmy.wtf 8 hours ago
One of those people
lumen@feddit.nl 8 hours ago
?