4 ms·
> I get it, but the alternative is what? Stop taking video in public, or at least of the public. You just assume you should be able to do that and the whole wo
by Hizonner 1y ago
> I get it, but the alternative is what?
Stop taking video in public, or at least of the public. You just assume you should be able to do that and the whole world should adjust to your preference. Maybe it should be the other way around.
- shmel 1y agoDo you also support a blanket ban of CCTV in public spaces? I am pretty sure that the bank had a camera in the ATM recording a public pavement 24/7 and nobody bats an eye.
- soiltype 1y agoMany people are actually quite uncomfortable with the prevalence of video surveillance, in fact. However, there are significant differences: 1. The camera is in a fixed position, 2. The footage is not typically shared let alone published online.
- Hizonner 1y ago> Do you also support a blanket ban of CCTV in public spaces? I'm not sure I support anything. I'm just pointing out that there is a path available if you don't just assume that you should be allowed to take video. But it wouldn't bother me at all to have, say, a rule that you couldn't have a surveillance camera covering any space you didn't own, and furthermore that if you had a camera covering a space that you did own that was open to the public, and recordings would be deleted after say 24 hours unless there was special justification to keep a specific one.