Continually pushed away from Hubski by the intense snobbery, continually pulled back in by the thoughtful discussions.
followed tags: 1
followed domains: 0
badges given: 0 of 1
member for: 2700 days
Since we're giving our opinion on things completely unrelated to the post, here's what I think: Your comment shows exactly the kind of Internet snark I wish I could find absent in a community. This is exactly the kind of unsolicited criticism I think few people would make in real life conversation. Even your edit has this kind of condescending superiority-complex tone. You give the impression that you care about the quality of conversations on Hubski, but I think this is exactly the kind of dogmatic authoritarian nonsense that drives people away from the discussion. Personally, I think vague questions sometimes provoke the most interesting responses, and I enjoy them on occasion.
I think you make a valid point about the post, but I don't think your opinion on the matter is necessarily canon, and I think you might do well to reconsider your tone.
That's really interesting. There's just something very discomforting about being watched by strangers with recording devices. People can watch us just with their eyes, and we might not give it much thought, but if they're recording it we get antsy, even if we aren't doing anything we would be embarrassed about or really need kept private. We all feel it. What's up with that?
What makes you so sure? I think that in the current climate people are just comfortable with who is pointing cameras at them. Once these cameras are really ubiquitous and in the hands of people who they do not trust, the laws on filming in public will at the very least be brought to the public's attention. We're not talking about constitutional rights here, so anything is subject to change. Except of course for our right against unlawful search (4th amendment)
And what batteries will be powering these always filming google glass headsets? I would love to get them in my laptop!
No I don't think Glass will change the scene much. Of course battery life will limit the filming capacity of the headsets and so will the need to speak or tap the headset to begin recording.
Interesting. I agree, of course, that you should ask as a matter of courtesy, but it will be interesting to see how the legal aspects of these activities evolve as more and more obvious recording is happening around us on a daily basis.
It seems to me that people are perfectly fine with being recorded as long as the recording is being done by a trusted authority. We see cameras all the time in banks, parking lots, street corners, airports, retail stores, etc., and nobody gives a damn. But as soon as the camera is in the hands of an individual who might post on youtube, the gloves come off.
The guy in this video was recording video mostly in a really aggressive way. I'd be more interested in seeing how people react when faced with cameras in the hands (or on the faces) of people with whom they're already interacting with naturally, i.e. during a retail transaction, personal conversation, etc. I'm not sure how anyone would go about experimenting with that, but it would be interesting to see something like this without the obvious deliberate intent to aggravate.
Good, but I liked this article a little better. http://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2012/12/note-nice-g...
I always thought it was "Ma Bell" as in "Mother Bell". "Maw" makes it sounds like a cavernous toothy mouth intent on devouring everything in its path, which on reflection actually seems curiously appropriate.
Sounds like everyday introversion to me dude.
This sounds good.