this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
-16 points (42.3% liked)
Technology
73331 readers
3686 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So this article went over everyone's head??? The surveillance apparatus is the that they were able to be identified immediately. You guys prove the authors point. It's so normalized it doesn't seem out of place. Not only that they were blasted around the world just as fast.
The post we're in right now showing their names and faces. The comment section we're in. This is part of the mass surveillance machine.
The witch hunt is self evident but I suppose I need to be blunt. It's because they're deemed worthy of your scorn. So you accept the dystopian surveillance state because in this instance it has served your purpose.
Crazy times.
So they were identified by a government agency or an entity acting within that scope?
There I fixed it.
Go to reddit and stay there if you want to debase yourself with that obtuse nonsense. Otherwise grow up.
And blocked. Have a nice day.
He was right actually. Like 100%.
Surveillance capitalism knows more about you than government agencies.
Facebook proved that well enough, the courts are supposed to be the remedy to that though.
The main problem I see here is that people still don't seem to understand what "public" means.
That applies to doing shit in public, but also posting shit publically.
If you do something in the open, expect that people will see it.
See it, sure. But as a society we used to have an expectation of anonymity, for better or worse.
If there was a video of you dancing funny in public, maybe your friends would recognize you, but the whole world wouldn't know your identity and remember it forever.
Shit, my workplace couldn't even identify the people who walked in the front door and stole stuff and walked out. The police could see their faces clearly in the security footage, but they weren't from around here and no one knew who they were.
Society used to be like that.
That's the case if you are some unimportant rando, yes.
But these two people we are talking about are very public figures due to their jobs, and they are compensated very well for this. As a public figure you can't have the expectation of anonymity. That just comes with the territory.
Every time JK Rowling lets out an anti-trans fart, the whole internet is up in arms. When my transphobe uncle does the same, nobody cares. Because one of them is a public figure and the other one is not.
If you would read the article, you would understand the point you're missing.
No one recognized them because they were public figures. In this case it's not clear how they were recognized, but in the general sense, it is clear that social media will gleefully dox randos using technology like facial recognition. Attractive security guards, people dancing, etc. Just yesterday, someone took a picture of me at the pool just for walking with messy hair.
The point the article is making is that anybody can be made a public figure now, because of technology.
I have read the article, and I got your point before, and I still think that it's totally moot and besides the point.
If they had been two total randos, say Max the car repair man cheating with Mandy the receptionist, then nobody would have even tried to recognize them. Not with social media, not with facial recognition not with anything else.
And even if Peter, the coworker of Max and Mandy would have recognized them, he'd maybe have told their partners, or he might have made fun of them at work, but that's it. Because these people don't matter.
To get back to your example: Somebody took a picture of you. Ok. Now what? Did that picture go viral on social media? Did that picture make it into international news? No. Because you don't matter.
And you said it yourself:
They could have identified me, that's the point.
We couldn't identify the criminals because that example was before facial recognition.
You read the article but you still don't get it.
You should be able to enjoy a concert without being put on display.
I don’t want my picture taken when I’m high as fuck and make out with strangers while partying.
Lol you really think a CEO, of a billion dollar company no less, being recognized on camera is "emblematic" of anything.
Don't pretend they are like us.
Yes surveillance capitalism is ruining the society, but this is not it. Surprising bad take from 404media.
They not like us
Divide et impera.