{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/12/2013 6:13:00 PM
24
I'd probly break the guy's camera. And the guy he sat down next to at the coffee shop did everything right. The guy with the camera with being a giant douche. One of the differences between Google Glass and this though is that people don't know they are being filmed, so it can't be directly applied. However, I do understand what you are trying to imply and it concerns me a little. The filming doesn't concern me, because anything I don't want people to see or know I don't express or do in public, so film me all you want, but all of this stuff being uploaded all the time, could be a nightmare for people trying to hide or those who just don't like to be exposed to the internet on such a personal level.
English
-
Edited by VIC: 3/12/2013 7:11:25 PMAs far as I know, Google Glass is going to have a small LED on the corner of one of the frames that will be lit when filming.
-
Gotcha. Still, most people won't notice. I don't make it a personal matter of noticing all the details of someone's glasses when I walk down the street or in a store, etc. I'm assuming others don't either. That brings up another point of mine...why pay more than $20-$30 for a pair of sunglasses people? I mean really.
-
You'd commit assault and then have to pay them $1,500 and court costs for compensation.
-
Why, because he is filming me without my consent after telling him not to? If the law protects him, then it is a constitutional violation of my pursuit of happiness.
-
He doesn't need your consent on public property.
-
I don't think you understand how the constitution works. Do you think you have free speech on internet message boards as well?
-
Edited by Cam: 3/12/2013 10:26:39 PMInternet boards are not public. I guarantee I know a lot more about the Constitution than you, so don't go there. Oops, for some reason it looked like you were replying to me, darn this new site layout.
-
Good on you for not editing out your misplaced condescending remark.
-
Blame the people who poorly designed the site to be deceiving. I didn't edit it because my point still stands.
-
-
I have no ill will towards you, right now! Haha!
-
Edited by Khirna: 3/12/2013 7:16:32 PMYou don't. The site is well within it's power to limit your speech in whatever way it sees fit. It's similar to a school or a workplace. By willfully entering and using the facilities, you have to abide by their rules.
-
Nice. So why do you think that it's unconstitutional for someone to film another person in public?
-
Also, in this current age where anything and everything can be uploaded instantly, laws may or may not need to be revised. Like I've said it's one thing to film a casual walk and stop on people for a few seconds, it's another to hound them with a camera for no apparent reason.
-
The filming is fine. Pestering them with the camera after being asked not for A, B, or C multiple times is starting to become harassment and that's not fine. I'm not saying people should expect privacy, but they should be able to expect not to be pestered by someone with a camera who is filming them for an unknown reason and has asked them to stop more than once. The people who immediately get angry are overreacting a bit.
-
Chances are, most people just walked away and ignored him, which is what you should do. He most likely just included the folks he got a rise out of. :)
-
Agreed. Still, trolling in real life is a good way to get a beat down. Whether or not the troller is found guilty of something is totally dependent on the judge, but I think this guy would not be found innocent. Of course, the other guy would be facing penalties too, but nonetheless, film the wrong person like this, especially in America, and you could end up injured.
-
You don't need consent (or agreement) to film people in public areas. If someone started filming me for no apparent reason, I would walk into a store or some other private business. Most stores don't let people film inside them.
-
That I understand, but if the guy made a point of following me around with his camera to just film me, then it reaches another level. He isn't just filming while walking down the street. I don't think the law would protect that after I've told him multiple times to back off and if it does, then there is a problem because technically, one person's freedom isn't supposed to impede another person's, which is exactly what the camera man is doing.
-
If you're in a public place, then telling someone to go away doesn't change the law. Now, if special circumstances arise, then you can get a restraining order from a court. That would change the law. But short of that, there's nothing you can do about someone filming you except go somewhere where they can't follow you.
-
If this is true, then there is an issue with the law and/or system in place.
-
Privacy laws are ancient. They were made for a time when the only cameras were TV and movie cameras. They were never meant to account for wearable face cameras, and the technology to share videos instantly from anywhere.
-
Valid point, but maybe that will change, because I'm waiting for contact lenses that can record everything. Nanotechnology isn't far from making this possible I would think. By far I mean in our lifetime, maybe 15 years.
-
And he'd have proof of it on video
