.:Hotcocoa:.

Okay, let’s imagine a world where its peaceful *peace-sign*, and nobody gets insulted, and all is nice and easy.. Then there’s only the privacy issue involved of allowing people to take photos of each other. So.. *cough* damn there’s alot of issues in here to address.. But okay, I should start Somewhere..

So.. googling “privacy, photo, people” I found some interesting articles:

“Google’s Street View and Privacy” http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2007/06/googles-street-view-and-privacy.html

“Street View only features imagery taken on public property. This imagery is no different from what any person can readily capture or see walking down the street.” Google also lets you remove inappropriate images, images that infringe on your privacy or present personal security concerns: just click on the help link and flag the current image.

All-seeing Google Street View prompts privacy fears http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1870995.ece

“The photographs… have prompted unease in part because there is no apparent attempt to blur people’s faces or number plates or obscure what is happening inside private properties along the route taken by the car-mounted cameras.

Privacy law in both the US and the UK broadly allows the publication of photographs in public places.

People could contest under England’s privacy laws would be those of children and those that showed intimate acts in private places, such as sunbathing naked in one’s garden.”

Blah blah blah

Nobody questions the privacy if a photo of the Sydney Opera House is posted up with people standing in front of it and uploaded to flicker.. They are viewable in public ><

Nobody raises a question when the paparazzi photographs of the hollywood celebrities and publishs it on the media. I’m sure You’ve all bought magazines before with such images in them, and probably at times, just to look at these infringment of privacy photos. Yet you criticise things like this? plz

At least here’s an article that supports me ;p

“The web is built on a lack of privacy” http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article1850998.ece

 ”If asked, most people will say that they’re concerned about protecting their privacy and their personal information, but their behaviour generally suggests otherwise. For starters, many people post all kinds of information about themselves on social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook, apparently oblivious to the fact that those goofy drunken party pics are not going to be so amusing to a potential employer who comes across them in a Google search.
Yet even people who are much more savvy and concerned often don’t want to make the sacrifices that privacy protection involves. “

A Comment in the site ^:

McNealy’s right and anyone who argues for privacy is standing in an empty barn long after the last horse is gone. That barn door’s not just standing open it got torn off years ago by various commercial and institutional special interests and they have actually laid it flat on some sawhorses to make it easier to eat our lunch. 
We don’t need privacy – we need anonymity. The Internet is not the problem – it’s the solution. There’s no need anyone we do business with to know anything about us unless we choose to sell them the data.

Here’s something straight to the point:

Scott McNealy, the colourful founder of Sun Microsystems, has been saying for years now in response to privacy issues: “You have no privacy. Get over it.”