The interesting aspect of it is that the only reason you and me discuss it is because of Apple's (natural) reaction to a camera backdoor install in their public

The interesting aspect of it is that the only reason you and me discuss it is because of Apple's (natural) reaction to a camera backdoor install in their public computers. We're not exactly caring about the artistic value of it, but the author might get positive returns on this project (fame, money, inspiration) only because it's a little bit wrong (maybe a little bit legal still). If the core artistic value was of concern, which is to show people what they look like while talking on a computer, which the author confessed was fine with consent since he himself noticed it while he knew he was filming himself, then we d probably brush it of "yeah right sure, like when we read" and basta. It's like the surrounding story is of more interest than the art piece and I think that's where the author should dig next time: he should find something that both strike by its artistic value while being made in interesting circumstances, to reach optimal value for us and him and lasting fame ! I think it says a lot also about the state of art these days where the work tends to be secondary to the circumstances because it's easier to generate quick loudness while hard to generate a long lasting hum like the ancients could with technique. But it's an impressive attempt nonetheless ! I think he's on to something with using software techniques.