Quote:
Originally Posted by D
The difference is that it's a matter of record.
Say someone's trying to hide his smoking habit from his family... or a woman's involved in a relationship with a man that she doesn't want her father to know about... or someone's seen entering a church that he'd rather keep private... or a politician is caught entering an adult bookstore.
Or, say, what if that guy in the second photo up top is married to another woman?
...or whatever issue someone might have. Even in public, there's still a certain assumption that what you're doing is not going to be broadcasted for the world to see in the form of a semi-permanant and widely accessible record
Sure, what google's doing is not technically illegal... but it is irresponsible, imho.
Consent forms should be obtained, or facial obfuscation technology should be employed liberally.
IMHO, that should be the cost of doing business in America... or anywhere, for that matter.
|
Good post.
What works well for me is the "granny argument": there are tons of things I do and say that I will happily share with the rest of the world. However, I do not particularly want my grandmother to know about them. I might make out in public with a woman without particularly caring what the passers-by think. However, I do not want my granny to be watching. I might post happily about the conversions of a new extreme bukkake site, and I am not ashamed of that in any way. However, I still don't want my damn granny to read about it. ("Honey, what does bukkake mean?" - yegh)
What Google is doing is, in a way, working towards a world where, whatever you do, you have to keep in mind that both your granny and your future grandchildren will be able to read all about it.
The meaning of "in public" has basically changed.