Hacker News Reader

Comment by arbitrage | Hacker News Reader

I would be totally cool with being recorded. I think its beyond time we get past the ridiculous false modesty that seems to be considered a virtue, but with no real benefit.

View on HN

It has less to do with "false modesty" and more to do with the fact that a recording of you is being sent somewhere, probably a Google server, which leaves the door open for someone to get a hold of it. That doesn't concern you at all?

Your medical records would be far more secure on Google's servers than almost any hospital server.

That kind of information should never, ever leave the hospital/doctor's office LAN in the first place.

How does that make any sense?

So when you go to another hospital, your records should be unavailable?

In the US, a lot of the time you can digitally access your records yourself

Unfortunately it can and it will. At this point in time, while the best option would be not to get recorded in the first place, I'd trust Google servers much more than anything a hospital deployed with help of random contractors.

Don't records and info need to be available to other medical personnel? What if you have to go to your local hospital? Having all that info on your doctor's office lan won't help you at a potentially crucial time. Or am I missing something?

The desire for privacy is not "false modesty"; given the sentence you just uttered, I'm not convinced you even know what false modesty even means. People have a hard enough time even talking to doctors about embarrassing or sensitive issues, put a camera in the room and they simply won't, privacy is a need for most human beings, it's not false, it's not fake or done out of a desire to appear a particular way, it's a psychological need. Most people are not exhibitionists, they do not like being watched, they do not like being recorded, and it's not remotely something they do for appearances, a.k.a. false modesty.

Right, and it also prevents positive outcomes. People chronically lie to their doctors about their actual lifestyle behavior and then are surprised that the Dr. didn't catch all the warning signs for some disease.

More data = better outcomes.

Cameras won't add more data as they'll simply discourage people from admitting anything or even going to a doctor. I would not allow my doctor to film me, nor would I imagine most sensible and normal people who have an ordinary sense of privacy. Your doctor works for you, not the other way around, you decide what is acceptable behavior, not them.

You sound like you live in a country where evidence of a pre-existing condition isn't a huge liability. In the United States, a recording of you admitting you've been sick for a while can literally bankrupt you (well, not while we still have ObamaCare but a repeal is too likely for us to let our guard down).

It's not "false modesty" to desires some privacy away from cameras when you're getting medically diagnosed with a condition.

Just because you're fine with it doesn't mean that there are people with sensitive medical conditions who would rather not have a video recording of themselves being examined.

If everyone fell under the same umbrella, I would agree (I would even potentially argue that we would all be better off for it). But I fear there will be a large class divide between who we can see naked, and who we can't. Additionally, I wouldn't mind so much because I'm quite happy with my body. Many people aren't, and I'm not sure that modesty is false for them.

The engineers at Google also don't seem to understand how the vast majority of people want to be treated.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com