Photography proves end of privacy
-
- Thread starter gr82bart
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Steinheil Orthostigmat 140mm brass lens (Germany, 1898)
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale FS: B&J Press 4x5 Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Kardan Color 8x10 Back
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Kardan Bi-System 4x5 Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FUJI GF 80mm f1.7 for GFX Camera
- Started by Guillaume Zuili
Forum statistics
Not surprising if you've been paying attention during the last few decades. Difficult to lay solely at the feet of photography as well. Nothing more than one tool of many. One has little expectation of privacy when posting online data of one's self. If it's any consolation sheer numbers make it easy to be nobody as long as you want to be no one. Seek attention and your 15 minutes eagerly awaits..............
Proves or proved?
Zuckerberg seems to think "privacy" is a 20C aberration. And not a spherical one either.
But as someone pointed out on twitter, privacy is still good for nazis but no good for the common joe and josephine,
how photography as practised by most of Photrio fits in is a whole nother matter of course.
Zuckerberg seems to think "privacy" is a 20C aberration. And not a spherical one either.
But as someone pointed out on twitter, privacy is still good for nazis but no good for the common joe and josephine,
how photography as practised by most of Photrio fits in is a whole nother matter of course.
You see, Art. The end of privacy started with the invention of the telephone and has been going down hill ever since. Certain types of photography have only helped it along..........Regards!
I'm not sure that people who have freedom of movement in a public space can have a reasonable expectation of privacy. My impression, from my street photography efforts, is that people don't actually want privacy, they want anonymity. And that's what rampant facial recognition technology will take away.
Defeating facial recognition is not difficult.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
that guy with a dog growing out of his head was the best part of the article 
Anonymity is bad for you. It encourages selfish and destructive behaviors. What society needs is more accountability for our own actions. A little less privacy, especially in the public realm, would do us all some good.
In an ideal world, yes. But there are a lot of con artists out there. The more anonymity you have, the harder it will be for the con artist to gain information about you and use it to trick you.
The right to privacy is a core American tenet!
Pure unmitigated MARXIST fantasy!
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,297
- Format
- Multi Format
There are electronic doo dads that are spying on us. It is the end of privacy Take a look at this article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...er-945a:homepage/story&utm_term=.9836c130df05
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...er-945a:homepage/story&utm_term=.9836c130df05
Only if we allow it!
Quite right. Misbehavior in a small, rural farm community, where everybody knows everything about everybody, is of a quite different nature than that in the anonymity of a big city.
Younger generations are growing up in a world where privacy is not expected. Many parents and grandparents endlessly post pictures of their kids to Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. When kids first get smart phones, they start posting selfies. When a teenager or young adult falls, his friends snap a quick shot for online use before helping him up. A woman who gets too drunk and acts up at a party will not only have stories to live down, but will have photographic and video evidence online for years to come. An online snapshot can evolve into an internet meme where varying political views may be attributed to an actual person.
After the Trayvon Martin shooting, the filmmaker Spike Lee gave out the name and address of an innocent uninvolved person with a similar name to the shooter so that he could be harassed. After the Charlottesville protests and death, a Social Justice Warrior incorrectly identified a protestor and hundreds of people called his employer demanding he be fired.
Privacy is a good thing, but hard to maintain in the 21st century.
After the Trayvon Martin shooting, the filmmaker Spike Lee gave out the name and address of an innocent uninvolved person with a similar name to the shooter so that he could be harassed. After the Charlottesville protests and death, a Social Justice Warrior incorrectly identified a protestor and hundreds of people called his employer demanding he be fired.
Privacy is a good thing, but hard to maintain in the 21st century.
It takes effort however privacy can be maintained as long as you don't draw the attention of someone with extensive resources.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.
#MAGA
Yes! "Secure in their papers" and all that, though it may not have gone far enough to protect privacy.
Private property rights are another core tenet, but they aren't Constitutionally protected at all (except fair compensation when eminent domain is exercised).
And the rest of the line in that song is/was: "and we'll all stay free".......Regards!
I don't think most people want to be anonymous, but the idea of surrounding yourself with family and friends has always included telepresence using language (runners, written correspondence, telecom) and images (photographs of family friends) and tech has always been the vehicle only now have severely compressed the time frame of transfer over distance. Distance has become less important while time has become more important. The problem is not technology or photography but inability to manage ethical problems in such a compressed time frame.
Last edited:
-
- cowanw
- Deleted
- Reason: none of my business
Ethics, a totally forgotten trait today.
But there also is another side. Here in Germany recently law has been passed that strongly limits photography in public, to protect a person being photographed. In some cases even just taking photographs is prohibited.
In general the legal situation got so complex that even I myself have got problems evaluating a situation. As result there likely will come a situation where taking photographs as such will be considered disturbing. There already had been court decision in this direction before such law has been passed, and there are more and more restrictions within fenced public ground.
In general the legal situation got so complex that even I myself have got problems evaluating a situation. As result there likely will come a situation where taking photographs as such will be considered disturbing. There already had been court decision in this direction before such law has been passed, and there are more and more restrictions within fenced public ground.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
is it ?
i thought it was unlawful to search and sieze without a writ
( -- intolerable acts -- )
our michrowave has been photographing us for a while
seems like people are tolerant of more and more ...
( as i types this i am passing the non-fat dairy creamer to the trooper who is raiding the fridge ) ..
MattKing
Moderator
Is it posting the pics on your fridge?
I disagree. You can be a perfectly ethical human being and value your privacy. Valuing privacy doesn't correspond to having something to hide.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |