I think that this misses the part where, had they just laughed, smiled and done nothing untoward, we probably wouldn't be talking about it. Because no one would have thought anything of it. And thus no one would have dug into who they are.
Replies
Right, but what if you’re in public and you spill water on your pants and somebody is filming? Do they ignore it? Or do they post something that says you peed your pants? Then what happens to your life when millions of people are falsely taking glee in your imagined incontinence?
jul 18, 2025, 6:55 pm • 1 0 • view
I mean ... what is your proposed solution to this? Banning audience facing cameras?
jul 18, 2025, 7:05 pm • 1 0 • view
Regulating facial recognition software that makes it significantly easier to identify strangers is a good start. It makes it more challenging to target specific individuals. I think the handheld recording device in every pocket genie isn’t going back in the lamp.
jul 18, 2025, 7:08 pm • 0 0 • view
Yeah, and neither is software man. It's a big planet with 197 countries and a lot of them are linked with the internet. For how well suppressing information through the internet works, have a look at China and how often people get around their Great Wall and the censors.
jul 18, 2025, 7:12 pm • 0 0 • view
Ultimately, what everyone is concerned about requires a big shift in the public zeitgeist. As in, it will require a shift in what is "acceptable" use of cameras and social media, not laws and vague recriminations.
jul 18, 2025, 7:13 pm • 0 0 • view
Software can be regulated. It doesn’t outright prevent misuse, but it makes it more difficult. I agree with you though. Societal norms have changed significantly, and for the worse in many regards. Not sure how to fix that…maybe finding the aforementioned genie and lamp…
jul 18, 2025, 7:18 pm • 1 0 • view
Maybe, but that's irrelevant to the point that is being raised here
jul 19, 2025, 12:02 pm • 0 0 • view
Well instinct impulse >>> rational behavior.
jul 18, 2025, 3:03 am • 4 0 • view