Switching gears

[Stephen D. Williams]

I can identify with that view somewhat.  What used to be the case was that people would heavily scrutinize, gossip, report, etc.
what others were doing.  That was a tyranny of sorts too.  By having more photos, video, and social sharing of all kinds, a much
wider range of life was exposed as being normal, harmless, tolerated, etc.  That trend is only going to continue.

The privacy laws in Europe seem good-hearted.  Hopefully they will turn out well.  Not sure that could work in the US, except by
convention.

I've been a bit of a photographer for a long time.  There is a lot of psychology about things, and it has been evolving.  And there
have been some funny missteps: Google Glass created a backlash while nobody cares at all if you have a GoPro running.  There is
etiquette about taking someone's picture, with reactions varying widely.  One interesting detail is that if you aren't looking at
someone, they generally don't care if you take their picture.  I have a few spherical cameras that I use as a tourist or in races.


On 9/21/16 10:42 AM, Tom wrote:
> I disagree.
>
> One cannot fight a tyranny (let's face it: a surveillance state is
> indeed a tyranny) this way. For example, in the EU this kind of stuff is
> just forbidden. And with whatever you might come up with, they'll criminalize
> it, 0.1% of the "offenders" will be punished and the rest of the
> populace will surrender.
>
> Therefore, the one and only effective way to get back freedom is to
> shutdown the tyranny. Maybe weapons are required, like in the US
> independence war, maybe a massive amount of people is required, like we
> east germans did in 1989.
>
> Anything else are illusions.
>
>
>
> Tom

sdw

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2176 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160921/4c53a703/attachment.txt>