3 ms·

There is a huge difference between eye witness memory or elaboration and recording audio or video.

• gknoy 11y ago
  Indeed: eyewitness accounts are notoriously inaccurate, whereas video can be replayed.
  • TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Which is a good thing about videos. Objective reality > subjective reality.
• dheera 11y ago
  My point is, this difference/gap may be closed in the future by technology, so inaccuracy of eyewitness memory shouldn't be used as a basis for ethical justification.
• drdaeman 11y ago
  Today, yes. Today recording means we're still taking a camera and do some actions. But love it or hate it, but it seems that we're grasping wearable computing. And that includes stuff like hearing, vision, memory or navigational aids, and such things depend on recording what's going on around the wearer. So, while today there's a clear distinction we're just bound to hit the issue some years in the future. And given that some tech is already there, said future doesn't seem to be too far away. Then the difference would be much smaller. Probably even non-existent if we'd get anywhere close to what transhumanistic sci-fi pictures ;) And this means a war between concepts - freedom to absorb and process information, and freedom to control your personal information. I'm not sure there is any objective approach for ethical problems, so, I guess, it would be just a matter of taste, chance and circumstances.
  • toomuchtodo 11y ago
    That's what laws and regulation are for. When people don't know how to handle tools (in this case, tech) properly.