17 ms·
Please don’t film me in 2023
- yboris 4y agoI've watched some Japanese video creators on YouTube and so often when they film streets they frame their shot so as to cut off the faces of those in public (whether by tilting the camera, or shooting a crowd where everyone is walking away). It's so polite, so considerate <3
- toomuchtodo 4y agohttps://kokoro-jp.com/columns/4027/ https://kokoro-jp.com/columns/4027/ > “It isn’t a criminal offense to photograph people’s faces in public, but it can be a civil offense if the person who has been photographed finds their likeness published anywhere. They can make a case against the photographer on the grounds of breach of privacy,” says Tia. “The threat of being identified in a creative’s work and suffering consequences for it is all the victim needs to prove in court.” > That’s why on most Japanese blogs, YouTube videos, and television programs, the faces of bystanders are blurred, an arduous and artistically painful process for any passionate creative. Tia says it best: “As an artist, mosaics and bars over the face can be such an ugly mark on one’s work.”
- viewtransform 4y agoI see a market for software that replaces those faces with "AI" faces. There's my startup idea for the day.
- blooalien 4y agoThat actually sounds like a totally valid use for those AI face generators. Gotta be hella better'n a big ol' blur or giant pixels where a face should be.
- DenisM 4y agoWatch out for that uncanny valley.
- nihilius 4y agoAlready done. Here was a link, like 1-2 months ago about a reality TV show or so wich replaced all faces with ai. Sadly I can’t find it right now.
- rippercushions 4y ago> As an artist, mosaics and bars over the face can be such an ugly mark on one’s work. Connoisseurs of Japanese art will know that legally mandated mosaics are not limited to faces.
- sotrue5 4y agoI assume this means NSFW stuff? I never see anyone call themself a "connoisseur" of art unless it's porn.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoIt was a clever, tasteful way of communicating that, yes.
- sotrue5 4y agoNot sure how tasteful it was
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- blitzar 4y agohttps://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/glossary/connoisseurs https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/glossary/connoi... "A connoisseur is a collector and/or art lover who is knowledgeable about works of art, in the sense of being able to recognise characteristic individual or regional styles. This skill is based on familiarity with a large number of pictures, and the ability to retain a visual memory of them."
- sotrue5 4y ago*On the internet
- 4y ago
- brippalcharrid 4y agoI wonder how this works in the case of identical twins, in which a person could independently contract to distribute a likeness that was indistinguishable from that of the other person.
- dangmyaccount 4y agoSo, I love japanese photography and their street photography is very lively and rooted in decades of tradition. A couple of years ago a famous photographer got some backlash for being "inconsiderate" but only lost his partnership with a famous camera manufacturer. How does this law fit with the very alive and active community of publishing street photographers?
- joe__f 4y agoThere are quite a few east Asian students in the city where I live, and especially the girls like to do photo shoots around town. They go to lengths to get shots without other people in, but I always got the impression they're doing it for aesthetics primarily above consideration for others
- bool3max 4y ago[flagged]
- Beaver117 4y agoIf you don't want to be robbed, lock your doors.
- silisili 4y agoThere's a big difference between being filmed more generally - security cameras, being in the background of some shot, a festival recording - than being the subject of the recording, mainly being harassed by people making stupid TikTok videos. The article is primarily about the latter. So this is like telling people to stay home if they don't want TikTokers harassing them in public. How about just stop bothering people you don't know for 'content'?
- b3morales 4y agoAgree, although personally I object to security cameras, too, the ones that are just surveilling the public sidewalk because who knows...
- Ataraxic 4y agoAsking someone in public a question isn't harassment. Doing the same with a video camera is also not harassment. If they make the polite request to stop and you don't, it would start to be harassment.
- 4y ago
- tinyspacewizard 4y agoBring back Surveillance Camera Man
- o_____________o 4y agoFunny, recently I started seeing some of the old videos republished on TT https://www.tiktok.com/@surveillancecameraman https://www.tiktok.com/@surveillancecameraman
- pks016 4y agoBrings back memories.
- snowpid 4y agoIn Germany filming strangers without consent is forbidden.
- lostlogin 4y agoHow do security cameras, dash cams etc get used?
- csunbird 4y agoSecurity cameras: You are only allowed to use them to film private land. Dash cam: The footage can not be published with faces and/or license plates legible (anything that can be linked to a person really). You are allowed to keep the footage for private purposes unedited.
- giantg2 4y agoSounds like a good system to me.
- noduerme 4y agoCertainly a lot of security cameras must face a public street?
- Lewton 4y ago“Certainly” not, as it’s against the law
- moritzwarhier 4y agoI know stores for sure that have cameras facing the street (at least I assume from the position of the entrance which is to observe). I think there is a law regulating where and if such a camera is allowed to be positioned and how you are allowed to process the imagery. It is also not forbidden to film out of my doorway, is it? Law is certainly complex in this case. Storing close-up videos of strangers indefinitely is hopefully forbidden, but not filming a street per se.
- defaultcompany 4y agoWhen I worked in film/tv production we were perpetually getting signed releases from people who were in the shot. Is this just not a thing now? Or is the downside so low that nobody cares?
- toomuchtodo 4y agoThe downside is proportional to pocket size. If you’re a rando Tik Toker or YouTuber, you have nothing to take (or so little, you can round down to zero). A production company has assets or capitalization at risk, hence the legal dance around releases.
- giantg2 4y agoIt can be a crime in some states depending on the circumstances, especially if audio is captured.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoDifferent shades from a release for being in the shot versus recording someone’s conversation, but an important call out nonetheless. Interestingly, I haven’t heard of any criminal cases where social media folks have recorded and shared public conversations on platforms (TikTok, r/PublicFreakout, etc). Doesn’t mean they don’t exist, so if you’ve got case law to share, drop it here. I presume (Not a lawyer! Not legal advice!) that depending on jurisdiction, you may record anything in public assuming there is no expectation of privacy in the situation. https://www.aapsonline.org/judicial/telephone.htm https://www.aapsonline.org/judicial/telephone.htm https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/24/18015374/whyd-you-push-that-button-record-stranger-public https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/24/18015374/whyd-you-push-t...
- giantg2 4y agoIn general, that's true. However there are exceptions. Things like upskirt shots, recording in courtrooms, recording full or partial nudity (ie filming sunbathers), etc.
- rvz 4y ago[flagged]
- maxbond 4y agoThe comment you linked is talking about how much they value finding community through TikTok, not how much they value ubiquitous surveillance. Transporting that comment to a different context to misconstrue it & then sneer at that person behind their back is terrible faith. Please don't do that on HN or anywhere.
- rvz 4y ago> The comment you linked is talking about how much they value finding community through TikTok, not how much they value ubiquitous surveillance. Nonsense. So the surveillance on TikTok is somehow 'abstract' and 'fear-mongering' as the comment said? [0][1] I'm assuming you have read the entire comment and it turns out that the concerns of the parent comment has become true. Also with the entire point being that it has turned into the opposite of what the linked comment is describing, just like the initial utopian promises and expectations of social media a decade ago. It is naive for anyone to expect any better or different after the spyware reports on individuals in the US [0] and access to US data from overseas [1] after TikTok lied and continue denying it, making it more worse than Facebook. For his comment to be put in contrast against reality and calling it 'abstract' and 'fear-mongering' is not only laughable, it has aged absolutely terribly. [0] https://futurism.com/tiktok-spy-locations-specific-americans https://futurism.com/tiktok-spy-locations-specific-americans [1] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-tapes-us-user-data-china-bytedance-access https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-...
- Ataraxic 4y agoFeel like this article is trying to tie many disparate complaints about people filming in public together. It at one time criticizes the surveillance state and then also tries to connect it to the "man on the street" format. Seems simply like a compilation of complaints by someone who doesn't like to be filmed in public.
- durkie 4y agoYes? The article is titled "Please don't film me in 2023"
- XorNot 4y agoThe point is that overt interference (sticking a microphone and camera in someones face) is very different to being incidentally captured by peoples security cameras, doorbells, dashcams, bodycams - that is, equipment which exists specifically to minimise interference in ones life.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y agoWe live in the world of free video hosting, image recognition and AI. We already scrape public profiles, and can use AI to guess if the author of some text are the same person or not. And we are spending more money on this and deploying it more widely. Starting to sound like free surveillance to me.
- XorNot 4y agoI don't know what your point is meant to be? Everything I just listed is surveillance technology, that's its purpose. It's surveillance technology people deploy to minimize interference by others in their own lives: ensuring interactions are recorded and cataloged is what keeps people honest and keeps the legal system out of my life because it provides a record that's very hard to dispute.
- sshine 4y agoI had some kids walk up on me in a mall sticking a speaker into my face asking some question. I was eating and had my mouth full. So I just stared the main content creator in the eyes and preserved the awkward silence. Kids don’t know how to deal with that. He ended up apologising, saying he’ll delete the thing, and walked away before I had finished chewing. :-)
- jesuscript 4y agoThat's a bigger issue isn't it? We have a generation of people (we can label em kids, but they are just people) that will grow up thinking it's normal to be an exhibitionist at all times. And they are the next people that will run the world. I'm just not optimistic about the future at all.
- edrxty 4y agoKids these days, amirite? Every generation has had their asshole exhibitionists. Technology has just been pushing said assholes towards making TikTube content lately. Boomers did the radio shock-jockey routine, X did deeply weird television and lately podcasts, Y did 1st gen/text+photo social media, and Z is doing 2nd gen/video+photo social media. This isn't Gen Y/Z being somehow inferior, "we" (the readers of this community) did this.
- jesuscript 4y agoHow different was 1970 to 1995? Socially people were under the same framework. There's a huge difference between 2005 at 2020 for example. I don't think we can chalk this up to get-off-my-lawn syndrome that simply. The music, games and movies are very much similar from times of old (you might like it, you might not, you might just be getting old, that's the part that never changes or causes alarm). It's social behavior that's peculiar - in a bad way.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 4y ago
- deepzn 4y ago..
- jesuscript 4y agoI would say that people are being introduced to patterns of behavior at very early ages where it is near impossible for the parent or local community to correct because it's happening at such a scale where it's hard to mitigate. That's the ugly truth about "normal", normal is never objective. Normal is always a function of how many people are doing it. If most of the world is dysfunctional, it will never be assessed as a dysfunction. It will be seen as normal.
- ozim 4y agoThese are mostly teenagers and young adults doing these things in a let’s say not so appropriate manner. One thing I have to say about (generalization) that group is that they don’t have much emotional intelligence - it does not have anything to do with technology. They are young and still learning life.
- amelius 4y ago> In my favorite TikTok video of 2022, ... Where is the video? At least provide a link.
- savef 4y agoIt's near the top of the article for me, but here you go: https://www.tiktok.com/@hot.shame/video/7133999030887140614 https://www.tiktok.com/@hot.shame/video/7133999030887140614
- evan_ 4y agoit's embedded directly below the text you quoted
- autoexec 4y agoI had the same complaint, but I have JS disabled and it doesn't show up at all for me. An actual link would have been much clearer.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hartator 4y ago> In the case of random TikTok creators, it’s clear the level of consent and notice runs the gamut. I am reading this like this: When Verge is doing this, it is obviously legit and obviously not when it’s Tiktokers. Without backing this with any data.
- starwind 4y agoI haven't seen a video from the Verge where they walk up to random people randomly, stick a mic in their face, and ask them random questions
- stoppingin 4y agoI'm not sure what it's called, but I've seen a product which is a database of the time/location of US car license plate sightings. As I understand it, these are OCR'd from a combination of private, and public footage. I wonder if something similar exists for faces, and if some company is performing facial recognition on publicly uploaded footage. It sounds quite paranoid, however we know for a fact that such technology exists, and that there's a motivation for it.
- RhodesianHunter 4y agoAll of the tow companies have cameras on their trucks so that they can sell this data.
- jacooper 4y agoMy god, where does the data mining end?
- mindslight 4y agoPrivacy legislation similar to the GDPR. Getting the definition of 'consent' right is critical. Until then, there is no end.
- nerdponx 4y agoNot just consent, but also making organizations liable for the data that they do collect with your consent.
- xpe 4y agoOmniscient beings don't need data mining.
- zx8080 4y agoFirst result in search: https://www.foxnews.com/auto/tesla-facial-recognition-cameras https://www.foxnews.com/auto/tesla-facial-recognition-camera...
- martin1975 4y agoUnless laws are passed to make filming others in public, this is unlikely to ever stop. Chances are, such laws will not get passed as it will intrude on civil liberties and free expression of many. I also recommend against swatting away, as the author in the Verge concludes he/she will do, at someone's phone if they don't consent to being recorded. You run the risk of breaking someone's phone that way, giving potential rise to increased conflict or a small claims suit. Best response is to walk away or ignore.
- standardUser 4y ago> Best response is to walk away or ignore. I think this is a good take, but I'd suggest the best response is to address the human being that is addressing you and say "no thanks".
- throwaway1777 4y agoHave you actually tried this? Most of the time the people filming you are not exactly pleasant to deal with and will laugh at you.
- standardUser 4y agoThen you can proceed to ignore them and/or walk away. Obviously. And yes, I live in Manhattan and before that downtown SF, so I'd wager I've been confronted by strangers far more often than the average person. One time I was in some sort of "soap opera" student project where I had to read some lines on tape. Another time a partner and I were confronted coming out of the Museum of Sex to be interviewed about our sex life. A video I was in at a park after Biden was announced the winner went semi-viral. One time at the corner of Polk x Post a man in a car tried to pick me up for sex work! I could go on.
- ubermonkey 4y agoAbsolutely not. People who take advantage of social mores to force interactions for commercial purposes are not entitled to the same grace and kindness you'd extend to a normal person. This is why it's entirely okay to just shut the door on salesmen, or just hang up on cold callers. Indeed, that is actually the BEST way, because anything you say or do besides that will be used, by a skilled salesperson, to try and pry open a longer interaction. These people are operating in bad faith, and should be treated accordingly.
- dangus 4y agoDon’t post articles like this. You’re feeding the beast. Hear me out: This shit doesn’t matter. We’re all very unlikely to be interviewed on the street like this by some influencer. Even if we are, tough shit, we’re in public, people are allowed to approach us and even film us. It happens. Be polite and decline and that’s it, story’s over. Nobody cares. But no, the story is isn’t over! The Verge wrote a big long article about this stupid thing you and I have never heard of, and now here it is on HN. Manufactured controversy: annoyingly, it’s controversy that feeds into the negative feelings that media and social media tend to propagate. By reading and sharing this article, the original influencers get more publicity and follows, so they’re more likely to do this stuff more.
- lamontcg 4y agoSome of us don't think it is healthy for people to be consuming that media either. Doesn't matter if you're personally going to be in the video its the consumption that bothers me. People hanging out on r/PublicFreakout getting very angry at other people probably does a lot more harm than good to society.
- jesuscript 4y agoIt's a form of voyeurism (exhibitionism and voyeurism are porn categories, they are fetishes). I do catch a few of those /r/PublicFreakouts, and they are often intense breakdowns of flawed people. Most of them are of the entitled/racist bunch. We know who the antagonists are immediately in those videos, but the principle of filming a breakdown always felt dirty to me. At least in the realm of sexuality, a fetish is acknowledged as a fetish (and fetishes are usually very private and should always require consent by all parties). I wonder how open people would be to the reality that they are indulging in a fetish by watching voyeuristic videos on /r/PublicFreakouts (sexual or not, and certainly without consent), or exhibitionism by constantly making videos of themselves.
- lamontcg 4y agoUsually it is a bunch of entitled/racist/etc people watching a public breakdown of an entitled/racist/etc person. Watch enough of them and you might get angry enough to wind up in one of them.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- uconnectlol 4y agoThey should normalize smart phones having a sliding door over the cameras and a small red recording LED. It's perfect.
- seydor 4y agoIt's also time to take down the satellites. The planned low orbit constellations leave no space on earth for people to hide or be free. National security or not, i truly hope there is a space war that will render the orbital space a dangerous zone for any army to operate. I'm fine with communication through terrestial cables only.
- uneekname 4y agoThis is a really interesting take that I've started thinking more about recently. On one hand, the data collected by new satellites has been groundbreaking for many industries, but on the other it feels a bit intrusive. I've worked on mapping projects that benefitted from ~3in resolution aerial imagery. When you study images with that level of detail, it's amazing what you can learn about an area. But having that amount of data collected on a regular basis would surely raise privacy concerns among citizens and governments alike.
- xpe 4y agoTell me what you are envisioning when it comes to space war?
- seydor 4y agosome explosion with a lot of debris will be enough to begin a chain reaction. But hopefully also terrestial lasers that can zap them out. Sabotage any attempt to build constellations like starlink
- alwayslikethis 4y agoIs it legal to use a hypothetical device to point a low powered laser at those cameras to wash out the images? I don't think so, but I'm curious as to what laws this would break.
- seydor 4y agoOTOH i was never asked to consent to being tracked with high precision in private places We can't face new challenges with ancient laws
- Animats 4y agoIn California, they owe you at least $750.[1] Celebrities can claim more, but everybody is entitled to as least $750. [1] https://california.public.law/codes/ca_civ_code_section_3344 https://california.public.law/codes/ca_civ_code_section_3344
- Invictus0 4y agoI'm at a loss as to how you can read that link and think it applies to filming people on the street. It states extremely clearly that you are only owed damaged if your likeness is used for the purpose of advertising or selling products.
- bagels 4y ago"Any person who knowingly uses another’s.., photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent" I guess it hinges on what is a product, or whether these videos are for the purpose of advertising or selling.
- xpe 4y agoSounds complicated. TikTok gets the advertising revenue? (I'm not familiar with how any potential profit sharing works.) Their lawyers / state sponsors probably have the bases covered.
- Animats 4y agoIt's complicated. See [1] Whether a monetized video is "advertising" is a nice legal question. [1] https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-right-publicity-law https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-right-publicity-...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- throw__away7391 4y agoEspecially the (sometimes intentionally provoked) outrage videos of Karens, road rage incidents, or fights, seem quite toxic to society as a whole.
- OJFord 4y ago> TikTok’s For You page has probably served you up a version of this kind of thing — the world first met Corn Kid The world didn't meet 'Corn Kid', whatever that is, the Venn diagram circle that is TikTok users may have. The intersection with the circle that is 'people who think this behaviour is bizarre and vile' is small, but those in it should take comfort in the fact that that second circle is very large, and the first probably a lot smaller, perhaps a lot more ephemeral, than they may think.
- borbulon 4y agoI see a lot of people talking about the legality of the thing, when this article is about the ethics of the thing. Sure, it’s legal to film people in public in the US without their consent. But it’s also shitty. Those two things can both be true. Maybe we might all be better off practicing DBAD: Don’t Be A Dick.
- jfengel 4y agoWe're Americans. If we practiced DBAD, pretty much everything would be different. Of all our American flaws, "It's not illegal for me to be a dick and therefore I am going to be on" is perhaps the one we're proudest of. (Followed, perhaps, by "It's illegal for me to be a dick but you can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt and that's as good as legal" and "It's illegal for me to be a dick but nobody is going to bother prosecuting therefore it's as good as legal.") It would be great if we all practiced Don't Be A Dick. But for those who are most harmed by people being dicks, we need to figure out ways to protect them legally, because otherwise people will be a dick to them as hard as they possibly can. And every time you try, people will say "Nobody is being a dick to me therefore nobody needs to be protected."
- okamiueru 4y ago[flagged]
- RGamma 4y agoIndividualism, lack of sanctions for misbehavior.
- bruce511 4y agoThere are two ways to view the world, and what we do in it. Which one we adopt largely depends on the one those around us adopt. I make no judgement about which is "better" or "worse" - they both have positives and negatives. Inevitably, and obviously, you can probably figure out which one you fall into based on which one you react to. In the first case, you view the world around you and yours. You see events and think "how does this affect me and people like me". If taxes are going up this means I get less money. The alternative is through the lens of "how does this affect others." - them and theirs - yes, taxes are going up, but those in need will get better medical care, and I already have enough money myself. It's not just about money. Basically every policy discussion revolves around "us" and "them". Immigration, inflation, exploitation, environment, defense, guns and do on. How will this affect me and mine. How will it affect them and theirs. Inevitably every policy has an impact on a continuum, but too often the extreme is presented by media to reinforce one end of the spectrum. Thus the extremes start to matter more than the nuanced middle ground.
- Buttons840 4y agoI fear public sentiment against filming will result in average people being unable to film while government and big business continue to quietly film en masse.
- thomassmith65 4y agoWhen I think of the near future, masses of 'average people' scare me as much or more as do government and big business. There are many more of them, for starters.
- Dudeman112 4y agoMasses of average people just go about their day afraid of doing anything that's not part of their routine You should only be scared of them if some Big Idea(tm) has them under their thumb Governments and big businesses are far more willing to be adversarial
- dominojab 4y ago[dead]
- SethMurphy 4y agoIf you don't have my consent then at the very least blur my features. I remember wearing Google Glass in Germany and I was looked at in fear. Since, they have enacted stricter privacy laws. We should look at it them as an example much like the world looks at the US for freedom related issues. One example in Germany is that suspects of a crime are not identified and the "perp walk" may be filmed and shown on the media but it is with blurred features. Freedom and privacy must be balanced.
- alwayslikethis 4y agoWe should normalize wearing small, flashing led diodes to break camera shots, and adversarial clothing to defeat facial recognition and similar technologies.
- rkagerer 4y agoAre these videos generating revenue for their uploaders? Could any lawyers around here comment on the viability of suing? Else what's the point of Hollywood studios being so laser-eyed about making sure everyone signs releases?
- el_don_almighty 4y agoA bunch of nerds whinging about laws and rules for protection? Where are the real tech solutions? The autofocus jammers? The ultrasonic microphone overdrive scramblers? The infrared iris scramblers? When did we lose control over the space around us? Take back our personal space!