←back to thread

IMG_0001

(walzr.com)
1576 points walz | 7 comments | | HN request time: 1.282s | source | bottom
Show context
kannonboy ◴[] No.42314852[source]
I love that the view count is included in the minimalist UI. I came across one with zero views, and there's something so intimate and exciting about being the first person to watch an ancient home video (even if it's shaky handycam footage of a horse, narrated in Russian).

As an aside, hats off to Google to being able to serve an 11 year old video with no noticeable delay from what must be the coldest of caches.

replies(6): >>42315729 #>>42316104 #>>42316775 #>>42320216 #>>42320625 #>>42321956 #
mattlondon ◴[] No.42316775[source]
I felt slightly uneasy myself - the first thing I saw was a mum laying on her bed doing a selfie-video with two small kids (probably between 2 and 4 years old) singing a song to daddy.

That felt like a total invasion of their private lives.

I've had the same videos from my own kids, and while there is nothing embarrassing or shameful about it, it's not something I'd want broadcasted. Maybe it hit a nerve for me as it is so very very similar to my own life right now. Sure yeah they uploaded it to YouTube and it's public but it still felt wrong to watch that.

Kinda ruined my day a bit - feel kinda bad for viewing it.

replies(10): >>42316879 #>>42316894 #>>42317594 #>>42317650 #>>42317802 #>>42318306 #>>42318344 #>>42320584 #>>42323459 #>>42323561 #
mdanger007 ◴[] No.42317650[source]
Ruined your day? Although it is undoubtedly tech voyeurism the fact that these observations occur in every day life and don’t violate people’s privacy I would just like to invite you to get out more.
replies(3): >>42318260 #>>42318297 #>>42318584 #
1. lukan ◴[] No.42318260[source]
"don’t violate people’s privacy"

Did you asked the kids in the videos (who are grownups or teenagers now) if they are ok with random strangers watching their kids life?

Also I would doubt, that most people were aware, that they were uploading the video to the general public.

So there are surely worse things going on, but I also felt uneasy after watching such private videos.

replies(1): >>42320791 #
2. fluoridation ◴[] No.42320791[source]
>Did you asked the kids in the videos (who are grownups or teenagers now) if they are ok with random strangers watching their kids life?

>Also I would doubt, that most people were aware, that they were uploading the video to the general public.

Those sentences are working against each other. You don't need to ask for permission to observe something in public. That's what makes the public sphere public; that there are restrictions and expectations in the private sphere that don't exist in the public sphere. If someone mistakenly believes they're in private when they're not, that's unfortunate for them. It's their responsibility to know where they are, not your responsibility to act according to their expectation. You're not obligated to avert your gaze if someone walks out in public not wearing pants by mistake. Is it polite to do it? Sure. Is it wrong not to do it? No.

replies(1): >>42320953 #
3. lukan ◴[] No.42320953[source]
"Those sentences are working against each other. "

Not when the topic is privacy. This is not someone walking in public, those are videos out of private homes. Just because someone uploaded something, does not mean he had

a) the rights to do so (I saw a clip where a women asked a bit angry, are you making a movie?)

B) was aware what he is doing

(Google and co do have a incentive to mislead people about who will be able to access data)

So it might be technical legal. It if is moral, is up to yourself to decide.

replies(2): >>42321037 #>>42321604 #
4. fluoridation ◴[] No.42321037{3}[source]
>This is not someone walking in public, those are videos out of private homes.

Yes, it's like someone watching a private video on their phone while on the train. You don't have a right to not have someone looking over your shoulder if you do that. While out in public you have implicit permission to look over someone else's shoulder because that's what "public" means. Public means the absence of privacy.

>a) the rights to do so (I saw a clip where a women asked a bit angry, are you making a movie?)

>B) was aware what he is doing

Both are the problem of whoever took the video and/or uploaded it, not of the person watching it later.

replies(1): >>42321464 #
5. lukan ◴[] No.42321464{4}[source]
Erm, it depends. If you have to go out of your way, to look into my screen, than no, not ok.

But if I have my screen careless in the open, that is on me.

replies(1): >>42323465 #
6. mdanger007 ◴[] No.42321604{3}[source]
If your issue is the unwitting use of people’s images for corporate profit I think we can agree that especially irksome when it’s children. But does it ruin your day or seeing especially exploitative to see a child at a petting zoo or celebrating their birthday like maybe one in a dozen clip show or is there room for nuance?
7. fluoridation ◴[] No.42323465{5}[source]
>If you have to go out of your way, to look into my screen, than no, not ok.

Well, I didn't talk about what is OK or not OK. What I said is you don't have a right to not have someone looking over your shoulder. Unless that person is touching you or following you to do it, there's nothing you can do to stop someone who's snooping at your screen in public if they don't want to stop.