5 ms·

Surveillance camera man is a troll that seems to be making a point as an excuse rather than a protest, IMO. I don't think people would be comfortable if a surve

Surveillance camera man is a troll that seems to be making a point as an excuse rather than a protest, IMO. I don't think people would be comfortable if a surveillance camera could stand a few inches away from them (sometimes while following) while answering questions with a disconcerting lack of affect. I also don't have to worry about being assaulted by a security camera... Americans live in a world where young antisocial men have become the stereotype for mass shooters. I'm incredibly familiar with the rights of photographers in public places and the extent of surveillance in public places, but I would also not be comfortable with the way he acts. He also walks into private property, like the back of restaurants, to record in multiple cases... behavior that serves no purpose and proves no point.

pwinnski 5y ago
Many of the private places into which he walks are already under surveillance that the people in those places have forgotten is there. To paraphrase someone else on this thread, the existence of EC2 means that we all have the equivalent of having a camera inches away from us or following us, and most of us don't even realize it. Nobody would be comfortable with the way he acts, and nobody should be comfortable with ubiquitous mass surveillance.
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  You're completely ignoring the fact that it's alarming for a person to act this way towards you in public... camera or not. He acts in a way that many people, especially women, associate with antisocial or predatory behavior. There's also a significant difference between employer-installed cameras and trespassing (which unlike photographing public space, is actually a crime). If someone stood stationary in a public place while recording, the reactions would be much more mundane. There are all sorts of street photographers who photograph people in public, and while people do get upset, it's nowhere near the frequency in his videos. There's a reason for that. There's a point to be made about surveillance, but surveillance camera man is also defying social norms to get these reactions... which severely clouds his alleged purpose.

pwinnski 5y ago

Many of the private places into which he walks are already under surveillance that the people in those places have forgotten is there. To paraphrase someone else on this thread, the existence of EC2 means that we all have the equivalent of having a camera inches away from us or following us, and most of us don't even realize it. Nobody would be comfortable with the way he acts, and nobody should be comfortable with ubiquitous mass surveillance.

micromacrofoot 5y ago
You're completely ignoring the fact that it's alarming for a person to act this way towards you in public... camera or not. He acts in a way that many people, especially women, associate with antisocial or predatory behavior. There's also a significant difference between employer-installed cameras and trespassing (which unlike photographing public space, is actually a crime). If someone stood stationary in a public place while recording, the reactions would be much more mundane. There are all sorts of street photographers who photograph people in public, and while people do get upset, it's nowhere near the frequency in his videos. There's a reason for that. There's a point to be made about surveillance, but surveillance camera man is also defying social norms to get these reactions... which severely clouds his alleged purpose.