8 ms·
Please stop live tweeting people’s private conversations
- nichochar 13y agoIt's weird, I somewhat agree but somehow I find them very entertaining, do you think the damage is that bad, especially if there are no names?
- parallelist 13y agoIt still demonstrates a lack of concern for the privacy of the people you overheard
- Atroxide 13y agowhat? People talking in public places have privacy?
- claudius 13y agoOf course they do, just as people walking around in public can have a sensible expectation of not being filmed or photographed randomly.
- nmcfarl 13y agoInterestingly, (to me) this is not an expectation I share, nor is it one I expected others to have. I assume my actions in public are captured by any number of shop cams, police cams, and tourist videos/photos and just straight iPhones being used for whatever. I'll note, that unlike others I this conversation have speculated, I'm not young, but I do live in a city - Seattle.
- parallelist 13y agoI’m not sure if you are being ironic but just in case you aren’t: Imagine you’re in a store, waiting at the checkout, having a conversation with your SO that has revealed some key difference of opinion on a topic that affects your relationship. You’re having the conversation in a public place not because the subject matter is public but because that’s where you happen to be at the time and the conversation is important to you and your SO. Now imagine the person who has been standing behind you in line doing something on their phone interrupts you and says "Your conversation is hilarious, I’m live tweeting it as you speak, please carry on" with a big grin on their face. How would you feel about that?
- chromanoid 13y agoThank you for the example, it's hard to understand that so many people cannot come up with such scenarios. They are proving a total lack of empathy.
- mikeash 13y agoI would feel extremely embarrassed and stupid at having carried out such a private conversation in a place where people could obviously overhear me, and would take care not to do so again.
- chromanoid 13y agoOf course, it can be embarrassing, but sometimes you are too emotional to not carry it out instantly. This display of humanity should not be frowned upon, but sympathetically ignored. If a real mental breakdown occurs, we should even get involved and help each other instead of posting it on twitter. Your victim blaming doesn't make it right, it just shows a lack of empathy.
- mikeash 13y agoAre you calling the woman abusing a flight attendant and the couple loudly breaking up on a rooftop "victims", or are you just referring to the more mundane events?
- chromanoid 13y agoOf course they are victims. Only because somebody does something, which might be annoying or in case of Diane offending (for the flight personnel), does not mean they become outlawed and can be rightfully, publicly and globally punished for their missteps by anyone who likes to do so. I think you only see black and white instead of the whole spectrum of the human condition.
- mikeash 13y agoI really don't get it, so: victims of what? I'm guessing the answer is something like "public shaming", in which case this does not make sense to me. It's like saying that a person who hits himself on the thumb with a hammer is a victim of assault and battery. They caused their own public shaming when they made a public spectacle of themselves. The tweeters just magnified it. It would have happened even without them.
- waterlion 13y agoThere are a range of people out there, all of them on all kinds of spectrums. Empathy, privacy, personality disorders, stress, oppression, rage, kindness, selfishness, selflessness, love, hate. The thing about 'real' friendships is that you can form into groups of people that you broadly correlate with. I think some people are naturally always going to be in conflict. With the internet you can't avoid this. Everyone is thrust together, and we realise that the spectrums really wider and more diverse than we realised. This is a story as old as long-distance communication and was very well illustrated yesterday in the whole Joyent "I would fire this man if I had the chance" thing. I have come to realise that there are people who really are happy to share very private things. I wouldn't dream of doing that. I haven't really associated with them 'in real life' because I don't think what I had for breakfast, or my medical or sexual history are anyone's business but my own and those close to me. How does this relate to TFA? There are a lot of people out there. They're all different. I find the examples in TFA abhorrent. I would feel violated to have my personal conversations broadcast. But we're all humans and we all have to get along, because we're all only humans. It's the price we pay for society and this wonderful Internet thing.
- Atroxide 13y agoAs long as they aren't identified (by name, picture, etc.) who cares? Also, this article is pretty lame. They complain about people live tweeting other people's private issues but then they share EVERY single one of these examples with links and backstories. This is doing the exact opposite that they preach.
- michh 13y agoPeople who may know them have more context and might recognise them, yes. If I'm on a flight from Amsterdam to London and I'm complaining to a friend about my boss, someone livetweeting my hilarious rant might keep me pretty unidentifiable by just using my first name. But my boss probably knows I was on a flight from Amsterdam to London that day (as I asked him for permission to take the time off) and based on the rant will probably know it's me, talking about him. That could have some pretty serious consequences. Of course, maybe I shouldn't complain about work in public, but would you honestly want to live in a world where you couldn't?
- ugexe 13y agoSo if I were to identify your family's address or your ssn online you wouldn't care? What about just your mothers phone number?
- Atroxide 13y agoThis IS identifying someone...
- danso 13y agoI guess it's comforting knowing that someone who has a job because of social media is willing to speak out about one of its particular excesses? That said, what is said in public is not private. This is generally good legal principle (as it pertains to the First Amendment) and it's good personal habit. If you don't want something to be exposed to the greater world and for perpetuity, than be discreet with whom and where you share it. It's not a direct consequence of our society being more untrustworthy, it's a direct consequence of today's technology and medium. You didn't think the ability to near-limitlessly duplicate content and effortlessly and carelessly distribute it wouldn't have a few downsides, did you?
- joosters 13y ago> If you don't want something to be exposed to the greater world and for perpetuity So the alternative is for me to hide in the basement for the rest of my life? That's a terrible argument. Public spaces are for everyone, new technology is no excuse for bad manners and offensive behavior.
- danso 13y agoUh, sorry. Why does anything require you to have to "hide in the basement for the rest of [your] life?" I walk into the supermarket knowing fully that a surveillance camera is at the front door, yet my distaste of that kind of surveillance does not force me to die of hunger (as all markets near me have cameras near by) I'm not arguing that the situation is good or bad but that it simply is, particularly because of today's communication technology. Are you really going to argue from a stance of "But I don't wanna!"?
- joosters 13y ago(n.b. the inside of a store is not a public space, so a bit of a bad example...) Outside, surveillance cameras are (supposedly) there for security. If the camera footage was used for other purposes then it would obviously be a problem. If the CCTV operator uploaded fun clips of people of the street to youtube then they would be in the wrong. Once again, it comes down to manners, and not technology. For instance, if a high-res camera was set up outside in public and recorded 'public' but hard-to-see stuff, such as numbers visible on the front of your credit card, or text messages on the screen of your phone, do you still think that would be acceptable? It's in public, after all...
- randallsquared 13y agoMy guess is that people who are now 5-10 years old will never find this sort of thing creepy. Eventually, our society will finish internalizing that there is no such thing as a private conversation in a public space.
- chromanoid 13y agoa horrible vision. humanity is about empathy, showing vulnerability, being close to each other, arguing with each other and helping to understand each other. when this is always accompanied by vitriolic comments and shitstorms we will live in a cage of groupthink and democratic oppression.
- chromanoid 13y agoThe author makes great points and I totally agree with her. People who publish private conversations are little Hunter Moores. It's pure voyeurism and bullying. It's about exploiting others for a little internet fame.
- mikeash 13y agoPlease stop attempting to have "private" conversations in public at a volume level where others can easily overhear you.
- parallelist 13y agoBut if you are around people that do, please don’t tweet it.
- mikeash 13y agoWhy should my actions be limited by the wishes of inconsiderate people?
- tokenrove 13y agoThat depends whether you want to repay inconsiderate behavior with inconsiderate behavior or not.
- aaronem 13y agoWell, gee, that's an awfully good question there, Mike. I dunno, I'm just spitballin' here -- I guess maybe you'd want to try to show that you're in some way better than them? Nah, of course not, what a ridiculous notion that'd be.
- mikeash 13y agoAn interesting notion, but not one I'm particularly prone to.
- aaronem 13y agoSuch candor is remarkable in this dissipated age. Don't get me wrong -- judging by what I've seen of you on HN, I'm quite glad I don't know you socially. But your forthrightness here is impressive nonetheless.
- ryguytilidie 13y agoThe upside for me here is that maybe people will have an ounce of self awareness and keep stuff like this a bit more to themselves versus throwing tantrums in front of everyone when the smallest thing goes wrong.
- parallelist 13y agoOnly if you think that public humiliation is an effective form of education
- mikeash 13y agoI imagine it to be quite effective education, personally.
- chromanoid 13y agoGroupthink is not a good educator.
- mikeash 13y agoI agree that it's not good, because it's mindless and can just as easily be wrong as right, but it is effective.
- chromanoid 13y agoYes, indeed. It is very effective and this is why it is so dangerous. Mind police stuff occurred the last century in Germany two times in a row with devastating results.
- NikolaTesla 13y agoCan you imagine how much self awareness folks will have when everyone can switch on their wearable device and record it live in HD?
- gpickett00 13y agoIronic that you're asking people to stop live tweeting conversations, then you link to said conversations and give them more pageviews.
- badman_ting 13y agoSome of the same people who had a huge problem with "creep shots" will take a surreptitious photo of someone in order to ridicule them, as if the lack of sexual interest makes it okay. I dunno, all I can figure is that everyone is terrible in their own way, and we love coming up with convoluted justifications as to why we're not terrible.
- Aqueous 13y agoWe don't need the NSA - we all monitor each other.
- vezzy-fnord 13y agoThis is perhaps the most aggravating thing of all. I don't have a Facebook account, but sometimes I wonder what profile I have on there from pictures and mentions by other people concerning me.
- systemtrigger 13y agoI count 18 instances of the word "tweet" and 7 of "Twitter" in that short post. For the love of language please stop referring to the medium. She makes a fair point, and I agree with her in the case of the man whose full name was revealed, but who is harmed when a story about "Diane" or "a couple in Brooklyn" is published?
- chromanoid 13y agoLike Mike Rogers says it: "You can't have your privacy violated if you don't know your privacy is violated." Or wut? (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131029/18020225059/mike-rogers-you-cant-have-your-privacy-violated-if-you-dont-know-about-it.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131029/18020225059/mike-r...) And in case of "Diane": You have a bad day, some depression or are socially incompetent? Shame on you, I am the Punisher and the world will now mock you for your failure!!1!
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- ohyes 13y agoDon't air your dirty laundry in public if you don't want everyone seeing it. Seriously, what happened to discretion? If I take off all of my clothes and run through Central Park, I can't get mad because someone took a nude picture of me. Don't go to the coffee shop to make a scene with your spouse. The problem is that people aren't embarrassed by their bad behavior without someone shaming them publicly. Adults ought to know better.
- chromanoid 13y agoYeah, I hate those people who show their human side in public expecting me to sympathetically ignore it. I think the state could really earn back some money for all the cameras in public places. Maybe with a TV show like this: "London Life, your neighbours firsthand -> Do you know this idiot? He broke down in Oxford street after seeing his 'girlfriend' with his best friend kissing. Such a shitty looser." -.-
- jasonlotito 13y agoYou consider crying over a cheating lover bad behavior?
- chromanoid 13y agoNo, of course not. But maybe the heartless persons who think washing your dirty laundry in public is for public entertainment and out of rudeness.
- jasonlotito 13y agoWell, the parent post was talking about bad behavior, and the roll out someone crying as an example. But now you are talking about something different from what the parent was referring to. Just trying to understand the context of your statement. It's important to know when someone ignores a parent comment and goes off on another tangent. In response to your point, what you are talking about is bad behavior. I mean, if you do something out of rudeness, that pretty much defines it right there. And no, I don't think publicly shaming someone who is publicly shaming someone is bad, as in the case of "Diane," especially with the outcome.
- mmuro 13y agoUgh, if you are in public it's not private. Might as well rename the title to "Please stop live tweeting people's public conversations" if you want to make a real point.
- chromanoid 13y agoYeah, I see forward to funeral live reports. These tearful moments are so much better than movies.
- mildtrepidation 13y agoI believe we should give others consideration at all times, unless or until they earn either our respect or our ire. It becomes more and more obvious how old-fashioned and unpopular people find this view. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem (well, a public one, anyway) without the great power that's been bestowed upon individuals by The Internet. All hail the internet, enabler of bad behavior from 4chan to Twitter (though with the kind of deeds documented here, I'm starting to wonder where the difference between the two went). Now we have a total disregard for others coupled with the widespread ability to disseminate any kind of vitriol at the speed of LTE. Not what I'd call social progress.
- mikeash 13y agoWhy doesn't shoving a private conversation in my ear qualify as earning my ire?
- iamben 13y agoUnfortunately if you ever drink in a bar, eat in a restaurant - hell, pretty much do anything in public - at some point you're going to overhear someone's conversation. If it bugs you that much, you could stay at home (or get headphones) :-)
- mikeash 13y agoIt's pretty minor ire. But on the other hand, it's a pretty minor act to relay a conversation held in public.
- iamben 13y agoHaha, perhaps, yes! But also why do we feel the need to relay it? Tit for tat?! Can't we just be better than that?! If you're really, really annoyed, why not just say to the conversationalists - "perhaps you could keep it down?"
- 13y ago
- jasonlotito 13y agoIs the problem the sharing or the tweeting? Or the live part? Or is it all 3? Because, frankly, this isn't new. It's the gossip train, except now digital, and a bit more anonymous.
- chromanoid 13y agoWhat about global reach, permanence and "newspapers" picking up the stories for cheap entertainment?
- jasonlotito 13y agoI guess what I'm asking is, at it's core, it's just gossip, but at what point does it cross the line? Where is that line? Because it's easy to say any gossip is crossing the line, but then complaining about a bad driver is exactly that: gossip about an anonymous party. Those "OH" tweets become just as bad. Which is why I ask: where do we draw that line?
- iamben 13y agoAt the end of the day, it's just bullying, isn't it? "Hey everyone, look at that kid who's just wet themselves - hahaha!" We've all done it. Doesn't make it right. Even if the person you're mocking has been a complete tool, you don't know the backstory. Sure, they may just be a horrible person, but imagine their kid had just died and as a result they'd snapped over something completely trivial?
- aaronem 13y agoI really think it takes a bit more than conducting oneself poorly on an aircraft to qualify for "horrible person". Kind of an asshole sometimes, at worst -- and that, of course, assumes that her behavior was accurately reported by this "Elan" item, in the course of proving himself scum entire.
- brohoolio 13y agoThat yearofelan thing was one of the lamest things I've seen. There is nothing entertaining about a celebrity harassing a woman on a plane via sexually harassing notes. You have no idea what's she's been through, where her state of mind is. Maybe the greater internet community hasn't experienced fucking terrible things in their lives that push you to the edge. Maybe they haven't had a family member with mental illness. This Elan guy clearly hasn't. I don't understand why people are supportive of him being a 5th grade internet troll in real life. If he would have stood up and said eat my dick to her in person instead of sending passive aggressive notes he would have been kicked off the flight, arrested and congrats delaying everyone. Instead he sends creepy threatening notes to her. Great. Good job troll. Way to further ruin someones day. He's lucky she didn't mention the notes to the flight attendants where it's possible everyone's thanksgiving gets ruined because the flight gets diverted and he gets arrested. I'm not sure why all the websites picked it up and said it "Won Thanksgiving." Sure, all those charities where awesome people are working at helping feed the poor don't win Thanksgiving, but some creepy celebrity saying "eat my dick" to some obviously stressed out women wins? Good job internet. And dammit he trolled me from afar because I got so worked up I wrote this damn post about it.
- chromanoid 13y agoThank you!
- sebastianavina 13y agoit's possible that diane sues that guy for sexual harrasment? he already confessed...
- yetanotherphd 13y agoI'm really really confused. A cool blogger can tell a woman to "eat my dick" and get a positive story in Huffington Post. The only issue raised on HN is his tweeting of her conversation, not his sexual harassment. But a guy refuses a pull request that changes "him" to "them" and there is huge uproar? Can someone please explain feminism to me? How do I get from "feminism is by definition the belief that women are people" to this?