I wonder how much (or in what way) "they" paid this guy to pretend to be Satoshi Nakamoto?
the sellers are con artists and shouldn't be allowed to prey on them
There are con-artist products in every grocery store. Singling out Whole Foods for that is really just an excercise in hippie-punching. If we really want to crack down on false advertising claims, then 1) we should first actually verify them false with research rather than kneejerk skepticism and 2) concentrate on claims most detrimental to public health first, and then after that, those most detrimental to the economy.
I doubt it will ever be truly widespread. Isn't it still illegal in most places to record people without prior permission, and threatening to record can also be seen as a threat?
No, it is not. In a public place you have no legal expectation of privacy. People can record you all they want. And they do.
What's going on here is that people don't like that fact. They don't like the government and corporate and even the individuals that are recording them everywhere all the time. They don't like being recorded with cell phones, either. But until now, it has been difficult to object to this "invasion of privacy". Along comes Google Glass, which just brings the reality to the forefront where you can't even pretend it isn't happening. Google Glass is both a symbol of "lost" privacy, and the first on-your-face-in-your-face implementation of the coming privacy-invading cyborg culture. While some embrace this future, others loathe and fear it.
In the case of the girl who was assaulted, battered, and robbed at the bar, there is an additional social factor. The people in that neighborhood bar HATE Google and have been assaulting Google employees on the street on their way to work. Hence the comment from the bar patron, "You people are ruining our city!" This incident was as much about hating Google and yuppie-techies in the city, as it was about privacy.
The (actual) privacy-in-public culture we've been living in was a brief and anomalous period in our history. In earlier days, you did not have much privacy in public places like streets and bars. The town was small, and "everyone knew everyone" (to some approximation). The whole town knew who was out and about, on what business, and talking to whom. And of course you could be overheard in bars. If you wanted privacy, you had to be a lot more discreet. When cities got big, it was possible to "get lost in the crowd" and hide in plain sight. Now things are turning around, and your activity outside your house is potentially exposed to everyone. With our new technology will come a return to the old no-privacy culture.
Society will adapt to provide some kinds of "public privacy" by opening bars that have a no-recording-devices policy. And there will be technological aspects to this. One example might be jamming of mobile devices on the premises. (This is currently illegal, and there are several social and legal issues to address there.) Another example: having to walk through the Device Detector (like a metal detector) gate at the bar entrance.
I have, on my head, a device with which I can access all the worlds knowledge, communicate with everyone on the planet, and record and share my life's experiences. I use it for looking at pictures of cats and picking fights with strangers in bars!
does anybody actually know the laws around recording in public? Obv you can record celebrities because they do it on TMZ. and obv you can record with a security camera. but sometimes a tv show is recording at an airport or whatever and I walk by and there are signs "by passing by this sign you consent to being recorded." so obviously the right to record someone else is not absolute.
Can anybody add any actual information to this vacuum?
You are taking those signs at face value and drawing a conclusion from them. But that's not how the world works. There is no need for the airport or a mall to inform you that you might be recorded in public. You do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when out in public. The reason for the sign is to intimidate the less-intelligent potential criminals who are going to the airport to steal people's luggage and such. The sign might more accurately read, "Attention Dumbshit: Don't Come In Here For Opportunistic Crime; Of Course You Are Being Recorded By Police Who Are Watching You On The Cameras, Hidden And Visible All Over The Place Here." But that wouldn't be as polite. Sometimes the signs do say things like, "Warning: Police Recording", though.
Some say Milk Man's come back to the future!
I have points but couldn't figure out how to mod the actual article -1 Flamebait
During your last session, did you (choose one):
(a) Receive email from your sister, Dorothy about her medical condition.
(b) Access your bank account 101000187-33400301
(c) Install a root kit onto 0F13C73AAB0D4E000028038C99D3125A
[CONTINUE TO LOGIN]
Lawyers wield the most dangerous weapon of all, the law.
"Hunting the most dangerous prey of all..."
I'll give you a twelve minute head start..