91
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Philosophosphorous@hexbear.net 48 points 1 month ago

am i just paranoid or will this make it harder to get evidence of abuse etc. while being presented as a wholesome anti-phone-surveillance thing?

[-] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 26 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Fuck. There's layers to this that I, again, didn't think of before I read these comments. Yeah, forbidding any scrutiny could also be bad.

Before knee-jerk "let people enjoy things" chants, I want to stress that not all fun that partygoes seek at parties is necessarily mutually consenting, or even directed toward conscious people.

(CW: SV, emotional and mental abuse)

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/01/brotopia-silicon-valley-secretive-orgiastic-inner-sanctum

[-] MattsAlt@hexbear.net 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Not debate bro'ing but Brock Turner was video taped wasn't he? The rampant toxic misogynistic culture doesn't really seem to care about being filmed and law enforcement and the judicial system don't either.

[-] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 14 points 1 month ago

I'd rather there be some way of at least presenting wrongdoing whether or not it's actually punished after it happens.

Saying "it wasn't punished therefore stop trying" is a head-first dive into the is/ought realm of bad ideas.

[-] MattsAlt@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I'm not saying to stop trying, moreso that the effort needs to be directed at a more productive area like security in these venues. My city scene has plenty of stories of security not caring at all when women complain about bad actors before things have escalated further

The sea of phones at concerts sucks, not to mention people filming and making fun of strangers having a good, weird time. Again, this isn't saying these issues are more important than assaults, but that phone control policies only seem to impact one end of the spectrum.

[-] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 21 points 1 month ago

That's what I'm assuming as well

[-] anindefinitearticle@hexbear.net 9 points 1 month ago

That's why instead of stickers, we should have lens caps with an easy toggle mechanism.

[-] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 19 points 1 month ago

There's an argument to be made about a lens that is visibly disabled. Good faith and creepers aren't known to overlap

[-] anindefinitearticle@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago

A lens cap visibly disables a lens, while allowing it to be taken off quickly and cleanly in an emergency (e.g. a cop enters).

[-] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

i agree, but it's also able to be removed quickly for some creeper shit.

I'm kind of leaning towards the slightly icky position of "people in this club know that photo evidence is not likely to exist"

There are probably still security cameras. You just need to be really good about using them.

this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
91 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13499 readers
838 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS