Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 60

Thread: Right Of Privacy

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts

    Right Of Privacy

    Here in America-land, we seem to believe we have a "Right Of Privacy."

    I wonder about that.

    Back in the 1700s, back in the Colonial days, if you were a bit of a poofter, if you drank too much, if you slept around, or if you cheated in business, EVERYBODY in your little town or rural hamlet eventually knew about it.

    Anonymity, it seems, is a relatively recent concept.

    Is a Right Of Privacy actually a rather sinister thing, and would society be better off if we just jettisoned such a thing for the common good?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,003
    Thanks
    891
    Thanked 1,009 Times in 538 Posts
    Jettison privacy for the common good? Bah. Humbug.


    Laws of man can be rather subjective as well as a 'common good' it's not always as simple as good or evil, and I'd rather not have someone watch and dictate how I live with their beliefs on what is right or good.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JFierce View Post
    Jettison privacy for the common good? Bah. Humbug.


    Laws of man can be rather subjective as well as a 'common good' it's not always as simple as good or evil, and I'd rather not have someone watch and dictate how I live with their beliefs on what is right or good.
    It's not so much the "dictate" part as the "watch" part:

    Yeah, I eat a bit too much saturated fat; yeah, I drinks a bit; and yeah, I like to (hypothetically) view porn involving women dressed up like horses.

    If I own up to these things and say "what of it?"

    How can anyone really hold it against me?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,888
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 3,154 Times in 1,067 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    How can anyone really hold it against me?
    Because it's different from what they like or what they think people should do.

    Do you live under a rock?
    "Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by s.ketch View Post
    * * *

    Do you live under a rock?
    Nah! I live on the East Side where Microsoft millionaires probably do far more decadent things with "escorts," hired from The Seattle Stranger, than I'd ever dream of!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Kamber Parrk For This Useful Post:


  7. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    SPACE, MUTHAFLIPPER
    Posts
    1,493
    Thanks
    2,741
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 378 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    if you slept around...
    Well... Just because everyone knows this one guy used a KFC bucket as a sex toy, doesn't mean everyone needs to know or have the right to know this one guy used a KFC bucket as a sex toy.
    Blog Thing: http://www.velda.me/
    Twitter Thing: @velderia
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,130
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 690 Times in 417 Posts
    The right to privacy doesn't really prevent your neighbours from looking, or trying to look, into your house with binoculars. It does protect you from the government breaking down your door. Or at least, it is supposed to protect you from that, but nowadays, there is a growing list of "offenses" (smoking the wrong stuff, growing the wrong stuff in your garden, believing the wrong stuff, being interested in the wrong political groupings, viewing wrong pictures, etc.) that, if you are suspected of committing them, the government may intrude on your privacy anyway.

    Contrary to popular opinion, the purpose of law is not primarily to protect us from criminals and crooks. It is primarily to protect us from the government and law enforcement. As it is, the protection is often inadequate. We'd be in deep trouble if we had no such protection at all.
    ____________________________________________
    My sketchbook thread:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...ight=blogmatix
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to blogmatix For This Useful Post:


  10. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blogmatix View Post
    The right to privacy doesn't really prevent your neighbours from looking, or trying to look, into your house with binoculars. It does protect you from the government breaking down your door. Or at least, it is supposed to protect you from that, but nowadays, there is a growing list of "offenses" (smoking the wrong stuff, growing the wrong stuff in your garden, believing the wrong stuff, being interested in the wrong political groupings, viewing wrong pictures, etc.) that, if you are suspected of committing them, the government may intrude on your privacy anyway.

    Contrary to popular opinion, the purpose of law is not primarily to protect us from criminals and crooks. It is primarily to protect us from the government and law enforcement. As it is, the protection is often inadequate. We'd be in deep trouble if we had no such protection at all.
    This is, inherently, an accurate view of the American legal system's view, circa mid 1960s re the early Warren Court.

    However, that view, evolving by way of various "penumbras and emanations" seems to have given way to a full blown right of privacy somehow separate from the hand of government.

    Fer instance, what right does Apple (in relation to their various devices I might employ) have to follow me around like an animal with an ear-tag in my (hypothetical) quest for pony-girl porn?

    But, what should I care? Am I not better off to say "so what?"

    To the Trooper who asks if it's OK to take a look inside my trunk-- is it not a more vigorous and liberating response to say "go ahead and waste your time searching you officious civil-service peon, 'cause you'll find nothing?" (If that is, indeed, the case?)-- rather than to cling to my "rights?"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,130
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 690 Times in 417 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    This is, inherently, an accurate view of the American legal system's view, circa mid 1960s re the early Warren Court.

    However, that view, evolving by way of various "penumbras and emanations" seems to have given way to a full blown right of privacy somehow separate from the hand of government.

    Fer instance, what right does Apple (in relation to their various devices I might employ) have to follow me around like an animal with an ear-tag in my (hypothetical) quest for pony-girl porn?
    As long as Apple does not use the power of the state to prevent me from searching out my favourite (hypothetical) pony-girl porn, I don't mind if they follow me around. They're a private company; I have the right to decide whether to buy any of their devices or software or not.

    But, what should I care? Am I not better off to say "so what?"

    To the Trooper who asks if it's OK to take a look inside my trunk-- is it not a more vigorous and liberating response to say "go ahead and waste your time searching you officious civil-service peon, 'cause you'll find nothing?" (If that is, indeed, the case?)-- rather than to cling to my "rights?"
    Well, ask yourself this: suppose some anonymous private citizen stops your car and requests to take a look in your trunk, would you then also think it is liberating to tell him to go ahead, or would you be more likely to tell him to go jump in a lake? Now why should it make any difference if he's wearing a uniform? What is he looking for in my trunk? What could I possibly have in there that is any of his business?

    I cannot think of all that many scenarios in which a cop has any need whatever to look inside my trunk, except if I live in a country where ever more and more things are illegal.

    They start with the trunk of your car, next they obtain the right to search your home, and before long they have the right to search your bodily orifices - after all, if you have nothing to hide, why should this bother you? And it is after all also all "for the public good" or "in the interest of safety."

    No thanks. I feel perfectly safe and do not need a nanny with a uniform and sidearm to "protect" me by invading my privacy. I also do not need to be "protected" from the things other people do in the privacy of THEIR own homes. As far as I am concerned, my neighbour is most welcome to smoke pot, praise Allah, download kiddie porn and fume and foam against Jews on Facebook, all at the same time. I do not feel any sense of threat from it whatsoever, it is none of my business and I do not need "protection" from it.
    ____________________________________________
    My sketchbook thread:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...ight=blogmatix
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts
    vineris: the village may be harsh, but the enforcers have to live in it as well. If the folk of our tiny Village know what house the Sheriff lives in, know what car his wife drives, and know where his kids walk to school, and go to the same barber-- it's a lot harder for him to cloak abusive behavior behind "anonymity."

    blogmatix: Apple's probably not the best example-- Google's targeted search algorithms, terms for social networking, and their moving into the phone market probably would make for a mixture that's ripe for "invasion of privacy" somewhere along the line. (The app store's pretty tight-laced-- don't think there's any pony porn there!)

    Point being, in the old days, back in the 20th century, you actually had to go to the seedier side of town, enter a real store in your "village" and interact with a live cashier if you wanted to buy some sort of specialty fetish porn. And, maybe you'd bump into your Sunday School teacher, the sheriff, or your mom or someone. . .

    In a "virtual" world, do you/should you have any more expectation of "privacy?" Like your neighbor example-- in the old days he would probably be railing against the Jews on a soapbox on the sidewalk or sitting in his raincoat watching real children in the park. . .

    Re the Trooper thing: it's pretty common for the authorities here to "politely" over-reach their actual authority on a regular basis. In fact, they're always pretty eager to do it on that "Cops" show. . . dumbasses always let them do the search. . .
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,130
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 690 Times in 417 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    blogmatix: Apple's probably not the best example-- Google's targeted search algorithms, terms for social networking, and their moving into the phone market probably would make for a mixture that's ripe for "invasion of privacy" somewhere along the line. (The app store's pretty tight-laced-- don't think there's any pony porn there!)
    I have no idea what pony porn even is. Something like this, perhaps?

    Right Of Privacy

    :-)

    Point being, in the old days, back in the 20th century, you actually had to go to the seedier side of town, enter a real store in your "village" and interact with a live cashier if you wanted to buy some sort of specialty fetish porn. And, maybe you'd bump into your Sunday School teacher, the sheriff, or your mom or someone. . .

    In a "virtual" world, do you/should you have any more expectation of "privacy?"
    No, probably not, and I do indeed not really mind all that much if companies use their websites to collect data on me in order to send me tailor-made spam. Same thing if an irate ex-boyfriend or girlfriend posts nude pics of you on the web: there are millions of nude pics on the web, with the result that yours will disappear into anonymity, unless you focus the attention on yourself by raising a stink about it. Wherever people live together, it is inevitable that they will find things out about one another, and short of outright Peeping Tommery I'm not sure we should worry too much about it.

    I do, however, insist on the right to my privacy when it comes to governments. After all, when I notice Tom peeping through the window I can close the curtains. Government agents do not give you that option, at least not unless the law specifies it, which is why we need the law (or alternatively, to abolish the police force.)

    Like your neighbor example-- in the old days he would probably be railing against the Jews on a soapbox on the sidewalk or sitting in his raincoat watching real children in the park. . .
    In the old days, society wasn't so paranoid that anyone would even notice him. Nowadays they would, and I have now heard of numerous cases in which solitary men have, at the instigation of paranoid parents, been asked by the friendly neighbourhood cop to leave the park, even when the men in question were there first. But that is perhaps another debate altogether.

    Re the Trooper thing: it's pretty common for the authorities here to "politely" over-reach their actual authority on a regular basis. In fact, they're always pretty eager to do it on that "Cops" show. . . dumbasses always let them do the search. . .
    Here it is not all that unusual for cops to brutally assault people, and indeed more people now die in police custody than did under apartheid. This despite very strict laws against such actions by the police. One can only imagine how it would go in the absence of any such laws.
    ____________________________________________
    My sketchbook thread:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...ight=blogmatix
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,906 Times in 2,547 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blogmatix View Post
    ... but nowadays, there is a growing list of "offenses" ...
    Including being female.
    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to JeffX99 For This Useful Post:


  16. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,003
    Thanks
    891
    Thanked 1,009 Times in 538 Posts
    Problem is I don't see one happening without the other, at least not in our society.
    When you watch your doing it to enforce something and those with power abuse it at some point. The common good is determined by who forges the laws, their intended purpose and what becomes of the system put into place. But it can also warp over time. As dystopian as that sounds lol.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 'Calvin and Hobbes' Creator Keeps Privacy
    By darth massacre in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: October 27th, 2005, 07:12 AM
  2. Art: Computer privacy infringement
    By Metin_7 in forum 3D ART, SCULPTURE ART & TOY ART
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 24th, 2004, 05:40 PM

Members who have read this thread: 1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook