“Though violence is not lawful, when it is offered in self-defense or for the defense of the defenseless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission.”
I think I understand where you’re coming from, and this is mostly humor and pedantry on my part, but given that the definition of “battery” is “unlawful intentional infliction of harmful or offensive physical contact,” the quote from Gandhi isn’t “pushing” it, rather is in perfect alignment, as he stated “unlawful” use as his acceptable use of violence.
I don’t think the shape of the camera matters half as much as:
overtly brandishing it at someone
trying to hide the fact that you are brandishing at someone (like by hiding it in your glasses)
Those actions are seen as aggressions by many, many people, as can be seen in the fallout from the original Google Glass, because there is an implicit desire to frame the target as guilty of something.
I’m sure this part is obvious now as it follows directly from above, but unprovoked aggressions violate the social contract, and brandishing cameras or surreptitiously recording people are widely regarded as aggressions.
Seeing the responses defending assaulting someone just for having a thing and not being able to tell the difference between being against your immediate response ovlf violence and defending something that is already fucking illegal makes me deeply distrust this entire website. You people are fucking insane and need to learn how to follow a thread of thought.
You think battery is acceptable but not illegal recording?
fwiw I think you are completely right for asking this. Violence-loving freaks around here, sometimes.
Wait, who says battery is unacceptable across the board? Has anyone ever taken that position?
I mean, Mohandas Gandhi thought so.
Nah
“Though violence is not lawful, when it is offered in self-defense or for the defense of the defenseless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission.”
Seems like pushing the definition of battery, buy I guess it does call for battering someone under certain conditions. 😅
I think I understand where you’re coming from, and this is mostly humor and pedantry on my part, but given that the definition of “battery” is “unlawful intentional infliction of harmful or offensive physical contact,” the quote from Gandhi isn’t “pushing” it, rather is in perfect alignment, as he stated “unlawful” use as his acceptable use of violence.
The right to privacy is important
Yes, I agree. So is the right to not have your shit rocked out in a public street because someone doesn’t like the shape of your camera
If someone breaches any part of the social contract, it seems a little rich to for them to lean on its protections while they’re doing it.
What part of the social contract is being breached by filming in public with a glasses shaped camera vs a regular camera
I don’t think the shape of the camera matters half as much as:
Those actions are seen as aggressions by many, many people, as can be seen in the fallout from the original Google Glass, because there is an implicit desire to frame the target as guilty of something.
I’m sure this part is obvious now as it follows directly from above, but unprovoked aggressions violate the social contract, and brandishing cameras or surreptitiously recording people are widely regarded as aggressions.
If I catch a glasshole directing their gaze at me, I’ll beer batter them, them deep fry them, head, glasses and all.
Ok, that’s murder but you do you
I have to ask why you think anyone would take a Jeussaurus seriously on Lemmy of all fucking places.
you don’t consider deliberately invading people’s privacy a form of assault?
that’s fucking cute.
If you’re in public, you have no expectation of privacy.
It’d be one thing if you were at a hospital or at home. But walking down the street? No such privacy.
apparently it’s already a problem in places with every expectation of privacy…
https://www.404media.co/metas-ray-ban-glasses-users-film-and-harass-massage-parlor-workers/
seeing your responses makes me distrust furries
Seeing the responses defending assaulting someone just for having a thing and not being able to tell the difference between being against your immediate response ovlf violence and defending something that is already fucking illegal makes me deeply distrust this entire website. You people are fucking insane and need to learn how to follow a thread of thought.
sure thing creep