Hppy goldfish bowl to you

[nancylebov]

Even though they have no legally recognized right of privacy while dealing with the public, police are apt to come down hard on people who record them.

Proposed glasses with transmitting videocam-- even if these don't turn out to work, I assume the tech isn't far away, and in your choice of frame styles at that.

I think this is getting close to very little privacy at all, but it may be worth it to get the police under control.

Links predictably thanks to The Agitator.

Comments

[madfilkentist]

A Boston man has filed a civil suit against the police for arresting him when he caught them beating someone up. This is currently being heard in court.

[heron61.livejournal.com]

I think this is getting close to very little privacy at all, but it may be worth it to get the police under control.

Agreed on both counts. The idea of privacy in public space has always been a bit on an illusion, but now it's becoming obviously silly, and I see far more advantages than disadvantages (at least as long as the general public has as much ability to record others as the government or large corporations). As for the police, I think the best solution is for all of them to have to wear head-mounted cameras, with fines and reprimands if their camera for some reason isn't working or is blocked. Then, scenes of arrests or shootings would be made public on-line. That would help keep the police honest.

My guess is that we're no more than 5 years away from life-logging becoming a small but significant hobby, and that will effectively end public privacy once and for all, and I won't miss it.

Naturally, many laws, like the ludicrous one in Illinois need to be changed, but there needs to be strong distinction made between recording someone in a public space, like a city street, and sticking a camera in their window (something that recent technology has also made a heck of a lot easier).