7 ms·
Feel 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
by Ataraxic 4y ago
Feel 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.