I think this argument is logically flawed. When you say public means not private you are glossing over the fact that public never before meant "available via digital media to the world." Instead it mean a public which had a localized context. Doesn't mean you are wrong, but you're paving over this obvious fact.

But what practical difference does it have that it's "available via digital media to the world."? Are you just opposed to people not in your physical location seeing you? Why?

There are a number of reasons, including:

- I see who sees me, a digital copy breaks this symmetry

- Recordings may be stored indefinitely, searched through, used for things I can't even imagine today

- In a local environment a specific behavior might be normal or accepted while in some other cultures it is not. This conflict is bound to happen

etc.

> used for things I can't even imagine today

So why worry about it? It's like worrying a camera will "capture your soul" or whatever the story about those tribesmen is.

> a local environment a specific behavior might be normal or accepted while in some other cultures it is not

Do you actually have an example of this or is this yet another hypothetical?

> Do you actually have an example of this or is this yet another hypothetical?

Some political view in Region A is wildly unaccepted in Region B, thus making them "enemies". See recent conflicts globally.

How's that relevant at all? Are you arguing that it's good to be ignorant of the views in other countries? Should we hide the fact that it's illegal to convert from Islam in Iran, because that might reflect poorly on them?

It's relevant e.g. when traveling, when working with international people/companies, or any authority for that matter, which might check your online presence. This is already happening today. People are getting detained for having opinions (both humanist or egocentric) online.

The difference is being seen in public is ephemeral and being recorded in public is eternal. In the former, your actions exist in fallible human memories for a short while at most; in the latter there is a permanent digital record of you, geotagged and time stamped and available for perfect recall forever.

And that's bad because?

Regardless, it's not what humans are used to, culturally, or in our recent human evolution. Lol maybe I don't disagree that it's a lizard thing. But then why would you force a thing on lizards that they don't like?

Even if you're right, and we all just should be comfortable with being seen by the internet when we're in any semi-public space, you can't expect human brains and culture to change on a dime, and you should expect weird effects.

Side note, this is a spectrum, not like a black and white thing. Semi-public is a thing, why not let it still be a thing

I'm not a fan of my out-of-the-home activities all being stored in an online database accessible to billions of people and automatically scanned by several different governments (including a list of foreign countries extensive enough to include at least one you wish it didn't, regardless of who you are) to build a profile of every person, from hobbies to schedule to gait recognition to psychographic profile.

But of course, that ship has sailed in much of the world, with the ubiquity of surveillance and the dearth of opposition.

I think you imagine governments as being a lot more capable and interested in you than they really are. You haven't even told me what you think they'll actually do with that dreaded database, except keep it.

I can confirm that you do indeed think the thing you said you think.

Also, you have correctly noted that I did not say that second thing (since nobody has asked me to).

Good job, 2/2 accuracy, would chat again.

There's a clear difference in scale between "people who also go to a private airsoft meetup with me will see me" and "the entire global population can see me", right?

Okay, and? There's a difference between one person seeing me in public and two, but no meaningful difference

Depends who the second person is. And of course we are in an age where companies pride themselves into hovering up as much "public" data as they can find, analyze it and sell it to whoever wants it, so "find every photo or video this face is in" could lead to quite a detailed profile depending on how often this happens. Scale matters.

(Similarly to how "we have license plates on cars to identify them if needed" is a thing and basically nobody complains that I can see your license plate when I walk past your car or write it down if needed, but thousands or millions of cameras recording all traffic and logging plates are something people are concerned about, even if its completely legal in some places)

What was that Larry Ellison quote that came up again over the weekend?

EDIT: or to bring a specific real-world example: A friend of mine does classes at a local studio that also offers martial arts courses, and some of the local right-wing bubble has gotten it in their head that this has to be "antifa combat training" and keeps screaming that this needs to be monitored. The current local government has been ignoring them, but a lot of people are probably quite happy now that there isn't an easy-to-get public record of who was there and "needs a visit" just because some influencer needed to film her dance lessons.

So your specific real world example is that nothing happened, but IF somebody had filmed them then you IMAGINE they would have "gotten a visit". Very specific and real world.

I think it's similar to the difference between "the cop watching me when I'm near them and are aware of it" and "the cop watching me all the time, wherever I go and I can't know anything about this" (which would be impossible before cameras).

There's a world of difference. I know the people in my local community and they know me. We speak the same dialects and use the same slang. Nobody is going to take some off-color idiom the wrong way or judge me for poor grammar or enunciation.

I know who the whackjobs are and don't need to interact with them or watch my speech to avoid triggering them and dealing with ensuing harassment, threats, violence.

You're afraid of threats and violence because they judge you for poor grammar? Okay...

I feel that there is a difference between being in the public sphere of the community one exists in, and being in a public sphere that is global and free of any context. Lots of questions pop up when I try to follow that line of thought.

Questions such as?

"noticing" is not the same as "permanently documenting and broadcasting to the internet". Used to be one needed to get signed photo releases from passerbys who appeared in your shots...

yep, it's the permanent nature of the recording put in to the public sphere that is the game changer for me.

I accept I am visible in public to all who share a space but I do not accept that the ephemeral nature of my existence in that space should be violated.

Any chance you're relatively young?

I've noticed that folks born after some point in the early 2000's tend to feel this way, and they don't even realize that the survellience in 1984 was meant to be problematic, or why it might feel that way to others

It seems that the panopticon has been normalized successfully.

Old. If I don't want to be seen somewhere, I either: don't go there, or sneak. If I sneak and get caught, I should've snuck better.

I think doing a members-only activity on private grounds is the opposite of public

Airsoft is probably played in a private woodland.