5 ms·

No, that's kind of just a fact? When you're in public, you're interacting with others, meaning your actions (or lack thereof) no longer only impacts yourself.

No, that's kind of just a fact? When you're in public, you're interacting with others, meaning your actions (or lack thereof) no longer only impacts yourself. So, it stops being solely your business, and starts to become slightly others', as well.

nobody9999 2y ago
>So, it stops being solely your business, and starts to become slightly others', as well. Whose? And under what circumstances? Please be specific and include appropriate legal precedents. Thanks!
- gianjohansen 2y ago
  Depends on the state and city, there's no federal law. Madison Square Garden (notoriously) use facial recognition to ban all lawyers from their venue who work at firms engaged in active litigation against them. This was upheld in May [1][2] since in NYC you can collect biometric data for commercial use without consent as long as it's signposted and you're not selling the data [3]. [1] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2023cv03380/597620/46/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-yor... [2] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/madison-square-garden-beats-suit-over-facial-id-system-at-venues https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/madison-square-gard... [3] https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/newyorkcity/latest/NYCadmin/0-0-0-131254 https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/newyorkcity/latest/NYC...
- try_the_bass 2y ago
  I don't know about case law, but when you walk into a grocery store, it certainly becomes their business! Where's the case law and precedent that says your business is only your own, even when on a public sidewalk or in a grocery store? If you're going to make such unreasonable demands, can we start with your own claims, since you made them first?
  - hombre_fatal 2y ago
    If you want to get your mind blown, bring up traffic light cameras in Texas where people use "I have the right to privacy" to literally mean they should be able to run a red light [and potentially T-bone someone]. Public roads should be a clear case where your business is everyone else's business since you're hurtling down the road in an increasingly heavier vehicle, but we're far from being able to acknowledge that.
    - try_the_bass 2y ago
      This only doesn't blow my mind because I've noticed a distinct trend among the most vocal "right to privacy" folks: they want to get away with anti-social behavior. I'm admittedly biased from spending a few years steeped in the cryptocurrency community, where literally everything has a hidden (or not!) self-serving agenda, however. But even beyond that realm, I see far too many privacy advocates whose examples of "reasons why you should want privacy" end up being examples of hiding bad behavior (infidelity, etc). If you couple this with anti-social people being privacy advocates out of necessity, it ends up reflecting very poorly on the privacy community as a whole.
- nobody9999 2y ago
  Gee, I wonder if some self righteous asshole is "lurking about...week old comments" So they can make themselves feel better by blathering on for no apparent reason. I guess we'll see, won't we?
unethical_ban 2y ago
You see no difference between Being seen by others, being recorded incidentally, being recorded constantly, and being recorded and analyzed by machines in real time?
- try_the_bass 2y ago
  Of course I see a difference among those. Where did I indicate anything to the contrary, or on the topic at all? How am I supposed to take you privacy advocates seriously when you make such wild logical leaps?
  - unethical_ban 2y ago
    Because your statement makes no point unless it is a defense of current technology. Most people don't expect others to look away while you pick your nose at the grocery store. The statement about defending privacy in public is almost always about tracking and the ease of it.
    - try_the_bass 2y ago
      That wasn't the statement I was replying to, though? Please re-read the thread, without injecting your own pre-conceived notions into it? The statement was simply this: "Because my business is my business and nobody else's. Full stop." When it comes to being in public or at a grocery store, this is simply untrue. Being in public involves interacting with other people, at which point it inherently ceases to be just your business, and starts to be others', too. That entitles them to some amount of say in it, however small it might be, depending on the context. No where did I say anything about the degree of surveillance?
      - unethical_ban 2y ago
        I did inject my preconceived notion into it. You are correct. Because usually, when someone says "my business is my business", they don't mean "no one has the right to look at me when I'm out in public". That kind of statement about my business being mine in public, is usually tied to tracking and/or persistent, shareable surveillance video.

nobody9999 2y ago

>So, it stops being solely your business, and starts to become slightly others', as well. Whose? And under what circumstances? Please be specific and include appropriate legal precedents. Thanks!

gianjohansen 2y ago
Depends on the state and city, there's no federal law. Madison Square Garden (notoriously) use facial recognition to ban all lawyers from their venue who work at firms engaged in active litigation against them. This was upheld in May [1][2] since in NYC you can collect biometric data for commercial use without consent as long as it's signposted and you're not selling the data [3]. [1] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2023cv03380/597620/46/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-yor... [2] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/madison-square-garden-beats-suit-over-facial-id-system-at-venues https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/madison-square-gard... [3] https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/newyorkcity/latest/NYCadmin/0-0-0-131254 https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/newyorkcity/latest/NYC...
try_the_bass 2y ago
I don't know about case law, but when you walk into a grocery store, it certainly becomes their business! Where's the case law and precedent that says your business is only your own, even when on a public sidewalk or in a grocery store? If you're going to make such unreasonable demands, can we start with your own claims, since you made them first?
- hombre_fatal 2y ago
  If you want to get your mind blown, bring up traffic light cameras in Texas where people use "I have the right to privacy" to literally mean they should be able to run a red light [and potentially T-bone someone]. Public roads should be a clear case where your business is everyone else's business since you're hurtling down the road in an increasingly heavier vehicle, but we're far from being able to acknowledge that.
  - try_the_bass 2y ago
    This only doesn't blow my mind because I've noticed a distinct trend among the most vocal "right to privacy" folks: they want to get away with anti-social behavior. I'm admittedly biased from spending a few years steeped in the cryptocurrency community, where literally everything has a hidden (or not!) self-serving agenda, however. But even beyond that realm, I see far too many privacy advocates whose examples of "reasons why you should want privacy" end up being examples of hiding bad behavior (infidelity, etc). If you couple this with anti-social people being privacy advocates out of necessity, it ends up reflecting very poorly on the privacy community as a whole.
nobody9999 2y ago
Gee, I wonder if some self righteous asshole is "lurking about...week old comments" So they can make themselves feel better by blathering on for no apparent reason. I guess we'll see, won't we?

unethical_ban 2y ago

You see no difference between Being seen by others, being recorded incidentally, being recorded constantly, and being recorded and analyzed by machines in real time?

try_the_bass 2y ago
Of course I see a difference among those. Where did I indicate anything to the contrary, or on the topic at all? How am I supposed to take you privacy advocates seriously when you make such wild logical leaps?
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  Because your statement makes no point unless it is a defense of current technology. Most people don't expect others to look away while you pick your nose at the grocery store. The statement about defending privacy in public is almost always about tracking and the ease of it.
  - try_the_bass 2y ago
    That wasn't the statement I was replying to, though? Please re-read the thread, without injecting your own pre-conceived notions into it? The statement was simply this: "Because my business is my business and nobody else's. Full stop." When it comes to being in public or at a grocery store, this is simply untrue. Being in public involves interacting with other people, at which point it inherently ceases to be just your business, and starts to be others', too. That entitles them to some amount of say in it, however small it might be, depending on the context. No where did I say anything about the degree of surveillance?
    - unethical_ban 2y ago
      I did inject my preconceived notion into it. You are correct. Because usually, when someone says "my business is my business", they don't mean "no one has the right to look at me when I'm out in public". That kind of statement about my business being mine in public, is usually tied to tracking and/or persistent, shareable surveillance video.