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.
He was recording in a very aggressive way. He literally sits down at someones table while they're on the phone. That's about as obnoxious as you can get. Watching a video like this makes me wonder how I would respond. I was at the park the other day and there was a guy there taking photos of the ducks in the pond. I had my daughter with me and I could see he was positioning himself to photograph her feeding the ducks. I intentionally stepped between his line of focus and her. I'm not sure why I felt compelled to block that shot, but I did.
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?
I think it's because we never know what they're going to do with it after they have recorded it. I normally wouldn't care much if they were only photographing me, but my wife and my daughter… That's another story.
Won't it become much less obvious when people are filming via google glass? As recording devices get smaller, and less obtrusive, and turned on without notice, how will we know when we are being recorded? We don't always know when we are right now (by random strangers). This is a particular concern for women and children, who's everyday, ordinary activities can be sexualized and uploaded to the Internet without their knowledge or consent, even now.
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.
I think people are very bothered by this practice, but what can they do? We're not going to start carrying around step-ladders and ripping down the cameras from the ceilings, and street lamps, and traffic lights, are we? There's no one you can complain to about it, and it's become such a common practice that there's no place you can go to avoid it. This really is a matter which any responsible group of lawmakers would have addressed long ago.We see cameras all the time in banks, parking lots, street corners, airports, retail stores, etc., and nobody gives a damn.
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)
I hear people expressing discomfort about these cameras frequently. And warrantless surveillance has, generally, been found to be in violation of the "unreasonable searches" clause, while privacy has been judged a fundamental right which is protected by the "due process" clause.What makes you so sure?