7 ms·

Your trash analogy doesn’t hold up because trash becomes “public” once it’s on the street which isn’t part of your property. “Publicly visible spot on my proper

Your trash analogy doesn’t hold up because trash becomes “public” once it’s on the street which isn’t part of your property. “Publicly visible spot on my property” is a meaningless phrase; it’s still my property, and I’m legally (here at least) allowed to raise an objection to the recording of it. I can’t and wouldn’t object to someone recoding the sidewalk in front of my house. I can, and absolutely will, object to someone recording my yard. You might not see a distinction but there absolutely is one.

dekhn 4y ago
I can't ask the people who drop their kids at the school across the street not to look at my yard, so why would I complain about a camera? Because it's always on and recording? Still not convincing to me. My exterior yard (the part not surrounded by a tall fence) is for everybody to look at. In fact lots of people stop by my house to look at our amazing maple tree and start conversations with us.
- soganess 4y ago
  Sorry you are not convinced, but looking and recording are different. If I hear my neighborhood talking - hearsay If I record my neighbors talking - admissible evidence
  - wilg 4y ago
    I believe they are both considered hearsay (in U.S. law), and both are admissible depending on the conditions
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  I think main differentiator is that an individual human is unlikely to stand in one place just watching for an extended period of time. It actually was very expensive to do that kind of surveillance not that long ago, which is why it was not deployed without a good reason. Camera, on the other hand, is cheap. Individual creep is preferable to a panopticon.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    None of these things really bother/worry me. This is mainly a threshold argument- a thing that was hard got easier, but didn't fundamentally change what is possible for a dedicated adversary.
    - uoaei 4y ago
      The scale of difference between $25/hr for a human and less than $0.01/day (amortized over the lifespan of the camera/service) changes the economics entirely. The circumstances before and after are paradigmatically different.
      - dekhn 4y ago
        kelnos 4y ago
        I don't think we're arguing with you anymore about whether or not you could be bothered, just that you somehow seem to think that there's no (or only a minor or incremental) difference between a human watching your property and a camera recording it, which is objectively false. And of course no one can resist trying to correct someone who is Wrong On The Internet. Also I think it's because it sounds like you're refusing to sympathize with people who might be uncomfortable with this sort of thing. Are you the kind of person who would reflect on this issue and say, "this doesn't bother me, but I can see why it might bother someone else, so I wouldn't point a camera at my neighbor's house"? Or are you the kind of person who would say "this doesn't bother me personally, so I'll just do whatever I want and ignore how other people feel about this"? You are definitely giving off the latter vibe here, which is anti-social and selfish (not the kind of neighbor I'd want to live next to, regardless of this particular issue). Hopefully that's not who you are, though, and we've all just gotten caught up in the argument and are appearing one-dimensional.
        dekhn 4y ago
- always2slow 4y ago
  - dekhn 4y ago
    I think it's totally uncalled for to call me a creep. I'm saying other people can point their cameras at my yard. When I point my camera I seriously consider that others don't share my values. And if they came over and asked nicely, I'd move the camera (it currently points at a neighbor's driveway). At least I'm open and honest about it.
    - always2slow 4y ago
      >I think it's totally uncalled for to call me a creep. I'm saying other people No I think it is called for, you clearly aren't getting it. The things you are saying, the behavior you're outlining and the justifications you are giving for it make you a creep. >can point their cameras at my yard. When I point my camera I seriously consider >that others don't share my values. And if they came over and asked nicely, I'd So you perform an act of intimidation[1], and then expect your neighbors to come to you and ask that you stop? This is not the behavior of a good person, no matter what you've convinced yourself. Good people do not intimidate their neighbors and then expect to be given the benefit of the doubt on top of it. This is the kind of thing a creep does to force interaction with them and then escalate their intimidation tactics. If you truly weren't a creep and you wanted to put a camera up, you'd ask your neighbors for permission first. Get their consent and then proceed only if they give it. So really at best you're a creep who doesn't see a problem with intimidating their neighbors at worst you're someone who doesn't understand or care about consent. >move the camera (it currently points at a neighbor's driveway). At least I'm >open and honest about it. Seriously, nothing about your responses here are showing that you're open and honest. You sound entitled and presumptuous. I'd invite you to please try to view this from a perspective that isn't your own. [1] You started out saying this, remember? - "The camera may be acting as a deterrent (if they didn't have any additional thefts) without it being obvious." The camera is acting as a deterrent by being intimidating, so at least you agree that a camera can be intimidating. edit: formatting
- alpaca128 4y ago
  Would you also be fine with people filming you through your windows? Why not, after all it's visible from a public space with the right angle. And windows are just part of another kind of "fence". In the end it's private property and that makes it private by default. Nobody can forbid you from looking at it, but imho filming is just as invasive as parking the car there while having greater potential for abuse. Filming has intent that goes farther than just randomly looking around.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    I use drapes and shapes to get privacy for my windows. My intent Here is to prevent school shootings and help investigate crimes that occur on my property or my neighbor's property. Definitely not my intent to stare at my neighbors in their private lives and they understand that completely.
    - alpaca128 4y ago
      How are cameras supposed to prevent school shootings? The best they can do is let you watch cops do nothing as we could see in Texas. Prevention is much more important and much cheaper but that's not done either. And I don't know why I'd spend money in anticipation of a potential crime in front of my home, donating data to Amazon in the meantime. The police is already tracking phones and using other methods no single camera can match.
rlewkov 4y ago
>I can, and absolutely will, object to someone recording my yard. You might not see a distinction but there absolutely is one. You certainly can raise an objection but it has no legal weight behind it. Anything that is in public view can be legally filmed. I think there may be some federal prohibitions against filming sensitive government areas though not sure if these have ever been testing in court. Walk around naked in your front yard or in your house in front of an open window you are eligible to be legally (though maybe creepily) filmed.
ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
> “Publicly visible spot on my property” is a meaningless phrase Indeed, your property or not, it's still a "publicly visible spot", and the creep is legally (in the US at least) allowed to be creepy in this way over your objections > I can, and absolutely will, object to someone recording my yard. The creep can, and absolutely will, object to your objections, and be allowed to continue (in the US at least). Privacy requires constant vigilance, in terms of electing lawmakers.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

dekhn 4y ago

I can't ask the people who drop their kids at the school across the street not to look at my yard, so why would I complain about a camera? Because it's always on and recording? Still not convincing to me. My exterior yard (the part not surrounded by a tall fence) is for everybody to look at. In fact lots of people stop by my house to look at our amazing maple tree and start conversations with us.

soganess 4y ago
Sorry you are not convinced, but looking and recording are different. If I hear my neighborhood talking - hearsay If I record my neighbors talking - admissible evidence
- wilg 4y ago
  I believe they are both considered hearsay (in U.S. law), and both are admissible depending on the conditions
A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
I think main differentiator is that an individual human is unlikely to stand in one place just watching for an extended period of time. It actually was very expensive to do that kind of surveillance not that long ago, which is why it was not deployed without a good reason. Camera, on the other hand, is cheap. Individual creep is preferable to a panopticon.
- dekhn 4y ago
  None of these things really bother/worry me. This is mainly a threshold argument- a thing that was hard got easier, but didn't fundamentally change what is possible for a dedicated adversary.
  - uoaei 4y ago
    The scale of difference between $25/hr for a human and less than $0.01/day (amortized over the lifespan of the camera/service) changes the economics entirely. The circumstances before and after are paradigmatically different.
    - dekhn 4y ago
      - kelnos 4y ago
        I don't think we're arguing with you anymore about whether or not you could be bothered, just that you somehow seem to think that there's no (or only a minor or incremental) difference between a human watching your property and a camera recording it, which is objectively false. And of course no one can resist trying to correct someone who is Wrong On The Internet. Also I think it's because it sounds like you're refusing to sympathize with people who might be uncomfortable with this sort of thing. Are you the kind of person who would reflect on this issue and say, "this doesn't bother me, but I can see why it might bother someone else, so I wouldn't point a camera at my neighbor's house"? Or are you the kind of person who would say "this doesn't bother me personally, so I'll just do whatever I want and ignore how other people feel about this"? You are definitely giving off the latter vibe here, which is anti-social and selfish (not the kind of neighbor I'd want to live next to, regardless of this particular issue). Hopefully that's not who you are, though, and we've all just gotten caught up in the argument and are appearing one-dimensional.
        dekhn 4y ago
always2slow 4y ago
- dekhn 4y ago
  I think it's totally uncalled for to call me a creep. I'm saying other people can point their cameras at my yard. When I point my camera I seriously consider that others don't share my values. And if they came over and asked nicely, I'd move the camera (it currently points at a neighbor's driveway). At least I'm open and honest about it.
  - always2slow 4y ago
    >I think it's totally uncalled for to call me a creep. I'm saying other people No I think it is called for, you clearly aren't getting it. The things you are saying, the behavior you're outlining and the justifications you are giving for it make you a creep. >can point their cameras at my yard. When I point my camera I seriously consider >that others don't share my values. And if they came over and asked nicely, I'd So you perform an act of intimidation[1], and then expect your neighbors to come to you and ask that you stop? This is not the behavior of a good person, no matter what you've convinced yourself. Good people do not intimidate their neighbors and then expect to be given the benefit of the doubt on top of it. This is the kind of thing a creep does to force interaction with them and then escalate their intimidation tactics. If you truly weren't a creep and you wanted to put a camera up, you'd ask your neighbors for permission first. Get their consent and then proceed only if they give it. So really at best you're a creep who doesn't see a problem with intimidating their neighbors at worst you're someone who doesn't understand or care about consent. >move the camera (it currently points at a neighbor's driveway). At least I'm >open and honest about it. Seriously, nothing about your responses here are showing that you're open and honest. You sound entitled and presumptuous. I'd invite you to please try to view this from a perspective that isn't your own. [1] You started out saying this, remember? - "The camera may be acting as a deterrent (if they didn't have any additional thefts) without it being obvious." The camera is acting as a deterrent by being intimidating, so at least you agree that a camera can be intimidating. edit: formatting
alpaca128 4y ago
Would you also be fine with people filming you through your windows? Why not, after all it's visible from a public space with the right angle. And windows are just part of another kind of "fence". In the end it's private property and that makes it private by default. Nobody can forbid you from looking at it, but imho filming is just as invasive as parking the car there while having greater potential for abuse. Filming has intent that goes farther than just randomly looking around.
- dekhn 4y ago
  I use drapes and shapes to get privacy for my windows. My intent Here is to prevent school shootings and help investigate crimes that occur on my property or my neighbor's property. Definitely not my intent to stare at my neighbors in their private lives and they understand that completely.
  - alpaca128 4y ago
    How are cameras supposed to prevent school shootings? The best they can do is let you watch cops do nothing as we could see in Texas. Prevention is much more important and much cheaper but that's not done either. And I don't know why I'd spend money in anticipation of a potential crime in front of my home, donating data to Amazon in the meantime. The police is already tracking phones and using other methods no single camera can match.

rlewkov 4y ago

>I can, and absolutely will, object to someone recording my yard. You might not see a distinction but there absolutely is one. You certainly can raise an objection but it has no legal weight behind it. Anything that is in public view can be legally filmed. I think there may be some federal prohibitions against filming sensitive government areas though not sure if these have ever been testing in court. Walk around naked in your front yard or in your house in front of an open window you are eligible to be legally (though maybe creepily) filmed.

ImPostingOnHN 4y ago

> “Publicly visible spot on my property” is a meaningless phrase Indeed, your property or not, it's still a "publicly visible spot", and the creep is legally (in the US at least) allowed to be creepy in this way over your objections > I can, and absolutely will, object to someone recording my yard. The creep can, and absolutely will, object to your objections, and be allowed to continue (in the US at least). Privacy requires constant vigilance, in terms of electing lawmakers.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]