this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
488 points (93.6% liked)

Privacy

3192 readers
123 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A New York subway rider has accused a woman of breaking his Meta smart glasses. She was later hailed as a hero.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 10 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Counter point: if you start filming me in public without my permission your phone is getting smashed, and I don’t care how shitty anybody thinks it is.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 17 points 2 weeks ago

I'm glad the law disagrees with you. Someone doing something you consider disrespectful doesn't justify assault and property damage.

It sounds like you have some anger control issues going on if that's your go-to response.

[–] lowspeedchase@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

When you wake up and walk outside to the corner store, you've had like 40 devices filming you.... lol

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yeah but there’s a difference between a security cam and someone filming me to mock me on the internet. And for the record I’m not stoked about everything else filming me either.

[–] lowspeedchase@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

https://www.foia.gov/ - Entire youtube channels with millions of followers request city camera, body cams, court cams, traffic cams.... everything... and mock you on the internet. I don't disagree with your feelings just reminding you of the world we live in.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 9 points 2 weeks ago

If I could get away with it I would destroy those too.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

Places where those cameras are required the most: police officers' cabins; mayors' and legislatives' offices.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] uncouple9831@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Yeah but I can't reach that high

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

Don't need to with a high powered laser pointer...

[–] lambalicious 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Time for a new iteration of the selfie stick!

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 2 weeks ago

The un-selfie stick

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Those devices don't get in your face, aren't easily manuevered to film like a creep. Also the same device don't follow you around like a stalker.

Are those differences really that hard to see?

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 2 weeks ago

I think the internet has ruined many people’s perceptions of what is socially acceptable and that there may be consequences for harassing others.

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

I like this comment

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Aren't these usually CCTVs?

[–] bitcrafter@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

That's why in video games I smash everything in order to be safe.

load more comments (7 replies)

... Are you a cop or something?

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

If you're in a public space, people may be filming you.

It's a PUBLIC space, not yours. Your lack of self-control will rightly get you fucked up if you assault the wrong person, and there'll be a good chance of everyone watching a satisfying video of you getting punched while trying to take someone's phone.

TLDR: Control yourself, tough guy.

[–] falseWhite@programming.dev 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

and there'll be a good chance of everyone watching a satisfying video of you getting punched

Funny how everyone agrees with the woman's actions and finds them satisfying instead.

Yet you are trying to use this argument to defend the asshole guy. Well, watch the video again and see how not a single person said anything, clearly they all agreed with the woman's actions and the guy got what he deserved.

Civil justice in progress when the laws and authorities fail.

Luckily laws can be changed. If there was a trial and a jury decided she is innocent, there would be precedent for all future cases to side with the person being filmed without consent and not the assholes.

"b... b... bUt iT wAs a PuBlIc PlaCe" - the assholes

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I'm not defending this guy, and yes, as I stated laws can be changed to account for new technologies and new definitions of public spaces and privacy rights.

The point I'm making is that people shouldn't start altercations that may have permanent consequences over their anger control problems, including the woman in question.

You can't put your hands on people unless they put their hands on you first, tough guy.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

Those comments are from men saving up for a pair to make videos of women for "further study" later.

I wonder how they feel about doing this on playgrounds around children?

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 6 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

Here's different optics to consider: we know for many camera-enabled devices to deliver recordings to the cloud, where the data is used by authorities, often times in a very improper way.

In US, it is coordinating ICE raids; in other countries, it's other kinds of shady and inhumane acts.

Fighting this on the level of legislation is great...when it works. Overturning the power of a dictator authority or simply struggling against decisions that are made up above often takes illegal, brutal acts, or at least ones of misdemeanor.

It sure never hurts to ask someone to stop first, but then I can see an angle when refusal is going to escalate things badly for reasons that could be understood.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 2 weeks ago

I think the assumption people are making here with my original comment is that I wouldn’t first tell them to stop and delete whatever they had recorded. Which is my fault because I can see that from the way I said it. But if that doesn’t work? Well, they don’t just get to keep doing it.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

So, creepy men are now allowed to stare and record videos of women because technology allows it?

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Something being in a public space does not give everyone there free reign to do things that are rude. And given the upvotes/downvotes it seems like most people tend to agree with me here.

[–] bitcrafter@programming.dev 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I was not going to downvote your comment despite disagreeing with it, but since you are now citing your downvote/upvote ratio as proof that most people support your position, you now get downvotes from me.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 6 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Fuck internet points.

When in public, you can be recorded. Your permission isn't required. Public spaces belong to all. People have the right to film, take photos, and record audio. If you don't want that, campaign for legislation to change it. "Rudeness" isn't a legal term. If you can't tolerate being recorded in a public space, even "rudely", leave. Go somewhere else. If you assault someone recording you in public, you will potentially get the shit kicked out of you by that person, bystanders, and/or cops.

The state, in a legalistic framework, has a near-monopoly on justified escalation to physical violence. The person recording you has to be assaulting you first or disturbing the peace to a degree that it endangers you or other people's safety in order for your violence to be justified as defense.

You can't start a fight legally, but you can finish one. "Rudeness" isn't a good enough reason to start swinging.

So again, control yourself.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

So, we are now supposed to just let creeps video record women because they paid for fancy glasses? Anyone notice this was a young, attractive woman?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn’t suggest assaulting anyone, you’re trying to paint this in a more violent light than it is.

[–] RustyShackleford@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Forcefully grabbing someone's property to break it is assault.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Then why is Donald Trump not in jail?

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 3 points 2 weeks ago

Because his handler has blackmail material on the people who would be able to do something about it.

The Corporatist Oligarchy wants him in the presidency (for now).

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] nednobbins@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you happen to work for ICE?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

And that's ridiculous. You have no expectation of privacy in public. I thought the hate was overblown back in the Google Glass days, too.

[–] lambalicious 3 points 2 weeks ago

You also should have, in a well-functioning society, no expectation of violation of personal rights (or even human rights) in public. Yet here we are.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

Nothing to do with privacy and everything to do with someone attempting to openly mock me and throw me on the internet without the expectation of consequences. It’s about respect.

load more comments (3 replies)