4 ms·

These photos seem fine to me and were likely provided by the team, I was just explaining the general problem. However, I've been on ancient digs where we decli

These photos seem fine to me and were likely provided by the team, I was just explaining the general problem. However, I've been on ancient digs where we declined to release pictures of the interesting bits due to ethical concerns, generally photos of graves or remains. It's also common if the photo would leak the location of a sensitive site, or violate someone's privacy. You're free to disagree with those standards, but they're widely-held enough that violating them will prevent publication and earn you a bad reputation.

MichaelZuo 6y ago
On deterring certain bad elements, that does sound credible. Though of course it would just mean some types of pictures are withheld, not all. It would have to be a very sensitive situation that no possible picture can be taken that is suitable for public release.
- shakna 6y ago
  > Though of course it would just mean some types of pictures are withheld, not all. Calculating where something is from light and shadows, is not that difficult. If you're trying to protect the location of a dig, it is usually safer to not release any photos at all. For example, last year's desert monolith didn't have its location shared on purpose, but with a little footage it took the public all of two days to locate it, by working out which flight path the helicopter took. Images leak location information.
folli 6y ago
Honest question: is there really an ethical concern if the graves are more than 2000 years old?
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  Many people, myself included, argue that there is. I acknowledge that there's a value to some excavations, but you should pursue those goals as respectfully as possible. If I can't ask descendants, the safest thing to do ethically is treat them as I would treat something equivalent in my own life. In a more pragmatic sense, trying to draw a line at some finite number of years always turns up an edge case like Kennewick man where someone genuinely cares about a 9k year old skeleton. Adopting the conservative approach of "extend the same respect to everyone, regardless of age" is both the simplest and the legally safest ethical system.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

MichaelZuo 6y ago

On deterring certain bad elements, that does sound credible. Though of course it would just mean some types of pictures are withheld, not all. It would have to be a very sensitive situation that no possible picture can be taken that is suitable for public release.

shakna 6y ago
> Though of course it would just mean some types of pictures are withheld, not all. Calculating where something is from light and shadows, is not that difficult. If you're trying to protect the location of a dig, it is usually safer to not release any photos at all. For example, last year's desert monolith didn't have its location shared on purpose, but with a little footage it took the public all of two days to locate it, by working out which flight path the helicopter took. Images leak location information.

folli 6y ago

Honest question: is there really an ethical concern if the graves are more than 2000 years old?

AlotOfReading 6y ago
Many people, myself included, argue that there is. I acknowledge that there's a value to some excavations, but you should pursue those goals as respectfully as possible. If I can't ask descendants, the safest thing to do ethically is treat them as I would treat something equivalent in my own life. In a more pragmatic sense, trying to draw a line at some finite number of years always turns up an edge case like Kennewick man where someone genuinely cares about a 9k year old skeleton. Adopting the conservative approach of "extend the same respect to everyone, regardless of age" is both the simplest and the legally safest ethical system.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]