Hacker News Reader

Comment by johannes1234321 | Hacker News Reader

> Just remind them, public photography is not a crime, and that there is no right to privacy in the public sphere,

That maybe true in some places. But it's a lot more nuanced in Germany. The "easy" one is publishing a picture where individuals are key to the picture (not background noise) that is clearly protected and requires permission.

It becomes a lot more complex when just taking a picture and not publishing it. There are arguments about this already being problematic due to processing of personal data etc.

However at CCC it becomes easy again: It's private ground, not public. And then they can forbid and be done. Then you need a legal argument about you taking a picture being more important than their rights. And no, American freedom of speech or so doesn't work.

View on HN

It’s a double-edged sword, and I concur that public photography should not be weaponized against the individual.

However, if I see a crime being committed, you can be sure I will be taking photo’s and dealing with the personal consequences later.

I am on the “public photography is not a crime and I don’t need anyone’s permission to record my personal experience” side of the debate, because I think that a society which does not allow free and open recording of events in the public sphere endangers itself, immensely.

I know it is incomprehensible to a lot of Germans, but without public photography being an open and uncontrolled activity, we wouldn’t have had the civil rights movement in the USA.

We wouldn’t know what was happening in Gaza every minute of the day.

There is a duty to protect this right in a free and open society - not just the American version of it - not just to record incivility and injustice, but also to promote the changes of culture in a society over time.

Would modern Germans have as much self awareness and responsibility for their state, if there were no candid photos of Sophie Scholl for future generations to refer to? A society which eschews such occurrences, endangers itself - indeed, censors itself. Germans are, after all, pretty much used to censoring themselves - but I think this has its limits and should not be tolerated.

So, I claim and exercise this activity because I think, as a responsible member of a society, it is important to hold the camera up - at times.

For sure, if someone asks me, I will comply with their wishes - I have no desire to confront a stranger with embarrassment or harassment by their own personal image - but I also think its necessary to resist the roboticism on this issue, particularly in Germany.

Yes, if a crime is committed or such there is a reason. That over weighs other reason. But 99% of everyday situations aren't that.

Then there is the other side: some I dividuals have very good reason for not being tracked. Be it key witnesses to some major crime, somebody taking a clear side on israel-palastine-conflict. Etc. These are few, too, just like crime.

In the middle are the "normal" people. For them is maybe a potential minor nuisance if their spouse sees they weren't they assumed to be or when the boss sees them in a private outfit or something.

And then there is German culture, which did quite some research in how two different dictatorial regimes used surveillance and which effort they took and how innocent people got into Stasi files and into total surveillance.

And then we have the technology. Hiding cameras and mics is trivial these days. And cloud vendors doing facial recognition on all pictures uploaded (including faces far in the background - sometimes I am fascinated how well even my locally hosted immich works and identifies my brothers where I am not sure which one it was ... while it sometimes still fails) which makes that a tough balance.

I agree, it’s a tough balance, which is why both sides of the position need to be evaluated carefully.

I’m not advocating a return to stasi levels of surveillance (although the German state is already well and truly in those woods) .. but I also believe that in a free and open society, it should be possible to celebrate the humanity of the world we live in.

I have decades of photos’ of German life. It is an immensely beautiful country, from the perspective of that archive. I would hate for my kids to not have that opportunity.

> (although the German state is already well and truly in those woods) ..

There is an issue. I see the bigger issue in Big Tech. What Google (or Apple or palantir or ...) knows about me, even if I manage to fully block them on my side. They get about half the email I send (Germany has strong alternatives like gmx but many people use it etc.), they know who got me in their address book, when we talk, they see pictures of me when others sync their photos to Google photos, including Geo data, ... Compared to such collections the state is weak. And they are completely outside of our jurisdiction. For a German government I at least got a vote. Even if just one of 60 million (eligible voters on Germany on federal level)

> but I also believe that in a free and open society,

It however must also be free for the one who doesn't want to be on pictures. One's freedom is the other's unfreedom.

Everything you post on the internet is subject to Stasi-level surveillance. Nobody has a way to know the picture you take won't be posted on the internet.

You are mixing a lot of things here. For one, taking a picture of a crime happening as capturing evidence overrules the right to one’s own image, as does the freedom of the press when capturing images of events of public interest.

However what is not okay, and I find that pretty reasonable, is taking a picture of someone else unaware of having their picture taken. I don’t want somebody taking a picture of me going about my life, no matter if I look goofy or wear an extremely cool outfit. You don’t get to take a picture of me, and I won’t take one of you either.

That does absolutely not imply that you couldn’t capture scenes of importance for whatever reason, and that happens literally all the time.

Germany sits on the 14th position of the press freedom index - the narrative you’re trying to construct about some kind of repression on documenting events in the public sphere is just not true.

>However what is not okay, and I find that pretty reasonable, is taking a picture of someone else unaware of having their picture taken.

That is covered by the law. Background subject? Okay. Foreground subject, picture taken covertly? Not okay. This is well understood.

>.. the narrative you’re trying to construct about some kind of repression on documenting events in the public sphere is just not true.

It’s only a matter of a generation or two, feeling entitled to privacy in a public space, until it is widespread ‘common knowledge’ that nobody can take pictures of anybody. That’s how these things work.

During a regular trip I observed some thugs harassing a woman and her dog in a public park in Berlin. I took their picture, they came to threaten me with violence and insist I delete it - I stalled long enough for the lady to make the call and I waited until the cops arrived.

The cops were grateful that there was a very definite picture of one of the thugs kicking her dog. They made the decision on the spot that I was not to be fined, and the lady thanked me. I sent her and the cops the picture, and I deleted it from my roll.

14th? Room for improvement, then.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com