5 ms·

it's a ridiculous law . You want to take a picture of your sleeping baby without waking her. Sucks to be you. Want to take a picture of your cat or dog without

it's a ridiculous law . You want to take a picture of your sleeping baby without waking her. Sucks to be you. Want to take a picture of your cat or dog without them changing their pose in response to the sound. You can't. Want to take a picture at a wedding without distrubing the mood? Or bad for you. Want to take a picture at a fancy quiet romantic dinner without annoying all the other guests? Can't do it. In the meantime any pervert (the claimed reason for the law) can use any non-phone camera or for that matter any other camera app than the built in one

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
>it's a ridiculous law It's par for the course. Laws in response to moral panics tend to suck and inconvenience reasonable people while having simple workarounds.
innocenat 7y ago
1st, it's not law. 2nd, if you are in Japan pretty much everyone is used to the shutter sound.
zingermc 7y ago
Is there a shutter sound if you take a video?
- nroets 7y ago
  Even if there is, it will only be at the beginning. So you can circumvent the intent of the law (e.g. filming the police) by starting to film yourself, pretending to stop and then point the camera at the subject.
  - Forbo 7y ago
    The intent of the law was to dissuade upskirt photos on trains, not filming the police, if I recall correctly.
    - kazagistar 7y ago
      There is always some bullshit moral outrage used as the excuse to make laws that are really there to protect existing institutions of power.
      - infecto 7y ago
        I think you are mistaken. There is no formal law AFAIK but it was just an agreement made by companies in Japan. You are free to order a phone outside of Japan. This was a huge issue in Japan when phones started getting cameras and so everyone made a handshake agreement.
        hrktb 7y ago
        I think it’s worse than that. As far as I remember Jphone, the company first heavily advertising camera phones, forced the shutter on its own to preemptively clear itself from any potential issue. Every phone carrier from there had the choice to forgo the mandatory shutter sound but risk backlash if anything were to happen, as Jphone set a precedent. And they choose the safety move. When the iPhone came, it would have just been a marketing quagmire to go with a mutable sound.
        brigandish 7y ago
        In Japan, the difference between formal law and cultural law with respect to their enforcement is often not a distinction worth making (as John Stuart Mill pointed out in On Liberty⁎). Just ask women how interested the police are in dealing with rape or domestic abuse. Only yesterday I was reading a Reddit thread where someone new to Japan asked whether to inform the police of the apparently violent arguments his neighbours were having and the responses varied from "don't bother, the police won't care" to "make a noise complaint, at least the police will be interested". That's the least scary anecdote I have. ⁎ Probably not about Japan specifically :)
        DerekRobot 7y ago
        Example: The gentlemen's agreement to end competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_motorcycles#Gentlemen's_agreement_to_end_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_mot...
criley2 7y ago
Ya know, any non-pervert can use those non-phone cameras for all of the use cases you mentioned too... Is taking pictures of your fancy dinner or jumpy pets really so hard to do with a superior and low cost dedicated camera? The results will be superior for a fraction of the price! Here's the thing you refuse to acknowledge (or perhaps didn't think through before writing) -- when someone is holding a P+S camera or bigger, everyone knows they're taking a picture. But when someone is holding a smartphone, you assume they are not taking a picture because 99.9% of the time phones are not in camera mode. The point wasn't to ensure that all cameras made noise, it was to ensure that a phone couldn't be used as a secret camera in public. Seriously, I struggle to parse the logic here: Do you think that creepers are taking actual full size cameras into subways for creepshots? Or are you thinking they're using "Spy Camera" type devices? Because the people the law was meant to deter generally aren't that level of creeper, and their creepshots are a crime of convenience not a premeditated act of sexual assault.
- bighi 7y ago
  The user you're replying to said "other camera app". They meant apps, not a full sized camera.
  - criley2 7y ago
    So, they're complaining that creeps can use apps to take pictures but regular people can't? Their whole argument boils down to regular users not being able to download an app from the app store? Wow. You're right, I assumed their argument was a lot better than that. Oof.
    - MadWombat 7y ago
      The argument is that the shutter sound inconveniences regular users while doing nothing to prevent the misuse it claims to prevent. Which part did you miss?
      - criley2 7y ago
        I missed the part where every creeper alive circumvents the policy without inconvenience but every other user alive can't. I require consistency, so either EVERYONE is inconvenienced, or EVERYONE can circumvent it without issue. The part I missed is the justification for inconsistent and illogical arguments where magically your ability to be inconvenienced is based only on your desire to be a creep.
Vrondi 7y ago
Just use a third party camera app. At least, this works on Android. Does this not work on iOS?
- greggman2 7y ago
  iOS has the issue that you can not select default apps, unlike Android. So yes you can use a 3rd party app but you can't make it the app that takes pictures when the phone is locked nor can you make it the app that gets launched from the accessible from anywhere control panel. In other words, their is friction using a 3rd party app. But of course that's also part of the issue. If 3rd party apps don't have to make a sound then what was the point of the law? The perverts can just use a 3rd party app and 99.999% of users have to deal with a stupid for no actual protection.
qtplatypus 7y ago
But it isn’t a law. Just something that the carriers agreed to do.
neop1x 7y ago
And someone always finds a way to get a device which can make photos silently. For example by importing it, modding it, using older devices, etc. It is not solving anything. It is simply a stupid law against users.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago

>it's a ridiculous law It's par for the course. Laws in response to moral panics tend to suck and inconvenience reasonable people while having simple workarounds.

innocenat 7y ago

1st, it's not law. 2nd, if you are in Japan pretty much everyone is used to the shutter sound.

zingermc 7y ago

Is there a shutter sound if you take a video?

nroets 7y ago
Even if there is, it will only be at the beginning. So you can circumvent the intent of the law (e.g. filming the police) by starting to film yourself, pretending to stop and then point the camera at the subject.
- Forbo 7y ago
  The intent of the law was to dissuade upskirt photos on trains, not filming the police, if I recall correctly.
  - kazagistar 7y ago
    There is always some bullshit moral outrage used as the excuse to make laws that are really there to protect existing institutions of power.
    - infecto 7y ago
      I think you are mistaken. There is no formal law AFAIK but it was just an agreement made by companies in Japan. You are free to order a phone outside of Japan. This was a huge issue in Japan when phones started getting cameras and so everyone made a handshake agreement.
      - hrktb 7y ago
        I think it’s worse than that. As far as I remember Jphone, the company first heavily advertising camera phones, forced the shutter on its own to preemptively clear itself from any potential issue. Every phone carrier from there had the choice to forgo the mandatory shutter sound but risk backlash if anything were to happen, as Jphone set a precedent. And they choose the safety move. When the iPhone came, it would have just been a marketing quagmire to go with a mutable sound.
      - brigandish 7y ago
        In Japan, the difference between formal law and cultural law with respect to their enforcement is often not a distinction worth making (as John Stuart Mill pointed out in On Liberty⁎). Just ask women how interested the police are in dealing with rape or domestic abuse. Only yesterday I was reading a Reddit thread where someone new to Japan asked whether to inform the police of the apparently violent arguments his neighbours were having and the responses varied from "don't bother, the police won't care" to "make a noise complaint, at least the police will be interested". That's the least scary anecdote I have. ⁎ Probably not about Japan specifically :)
        DerekRobot 7y ago
        Example: The gentlemen's agreement to end competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_motorcycles#Gentlemen's_agreement_to_end_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_mot...

criley2 7y ago

Ya know, any non-pervert can use those non-phone cameras for all of the use cases you mentioned too... Is taking pictures of your fancy dinner or jumpy pets really so hard to do with a superior and low cost dedicated camera? The results will be superior for a fraction of the price! Here's the thing you refuse to acknowledge (or perhaps didn't think through before writing) -- when someone is holding a P+S camera or bigger, everyone knows they're taking a picture. But when someone is holding a smartphone, you assume they are not taking a picture because 99.9% of the time phones are not in camera mode. The point wasn't to ensure that all cameras made noise, it was to ensure that a phone couldn't be used as a secret camera in public. Seriously, I struggle to parse the logic here: Do you think that creepers are taking actual full size cameras into subways for creepshots? Or are you thinking they're using "Spy Camera" type devices? Because the people the law was meant to deter generally aren't that level of creeper, and their creepshots are a crime of convenience not a premeditated act of sexual assault.

bighi 7y ago
The user you're replying to said "other camera app". They meant apps, not a full sized camera.
- criley2 7y ago
  So, they're complaining that creeps can use apps to take pictures but regular people can't? Their whole argument boils down to regular users not being able to download an app from the app store? Wow. You're right, I assumed their argument was a lot better than that. Oof.
  - MadWombat 7y ago
    The argument is that the shutter sound inconveniences regular users while doing nothing to prevent the misuse it claims to prevent. Which part did you miss?
    - criley2 7y ago
      I missed the part where every creeper alive circumvents the policy without inconvenience but every other user alive can't. I require consistency, so either EVERYONE is inconvenienced, or EVERYONE can circumvent it without issue. The part I missed is the justification for inconsistent and illogical arguments where magically your ability to be inconvenienced is based only on your desire to be a creep.

Vrondi 7y ago

Just use a third party camera app. At least, this works on Android. Does this not work on iOS?

greggman2 7y ago
iOS has the issue that you can not select default apps, unlike Android. So yes you can use a 3rd party app but you can't make it the app that takes pictures when the phone is locked nor can you make it the app that gets launched from the accessible from anywhere control panel. In other words, their is friction using a 3rd party app. But of course that's also part of the issue. If 3rd party apps don't have to make a sound then what was the point of the law? The perverts can just use a 3rd party app and 99.999% of users have to deal with a stupid for no actual protection.

qtplatypus 7y ago

But it isn’t a law. Just something that the carriers agreed to do.

neop1x 7y ago

And someone always finds a way to get a device which can make photos silently. For example by importing it, modding it, using older devices, etc. It is not solving anything. It is simply a stupid law against users.