Discussions

That's always been a description of the Coffeehouse, never changed AFAIK.

Younger dev, probably ... Based on his diatribe against certain classes of coworkers, and the diatribe alone. I can understand the feeling that you are being held back, but I also recognize how easy it is to break things that countless people rely on. To ignore elder wisdom, based on experience, is to fall hard on your *. This guy needs to be fired, sadly ... but he has to learn that attacking your food source like this, instead of wisely fighting the good fight from within, is a critical mistake. And if it is that intolerable that you are willing to publicly disgrace all your team, then GTFO.

Interesting stuff.

3 minutes ago, cbae wrote

*snip*

It's not "when". It's still very much "if". That's why we're having this dialog now, before it comes to pass. You're acting as if it's a foregone conclusion that there are going to be recording devices in every square inch of society. Even if we have such technological capability, we really ought to be asking "why?".

To me it is a forgone conclusion, yes, and I don't think anything is going to stop it.  Why?  History, virtual time travel, truth, protection, sharing information ... lots of reasons why.  You need the data before you can even know the full benefits that knowledge that data will bring.  And consequences.

@davewill:  You're not an "old fart", this is uncomfortable thoughts for everyone.  I am trying to just stir up a bit of a debate about what the rights and freedoms of people under such an environment should be.  I personally think of these devices becoming an extension of my own mind, and thus want to record and share any input I desire.  At the same time, it indeed makes me feel very insecure to think that someone could be watching and recording my every move in the future.  Where's the line, what should it look like?  Yeah, you should respect people's rights to privacy, and ask permission, but after a while, if the default is always on ... you'd have to ask everyone or dress yourself up in a Faraday cage or something. 

Cloaking devices are the only answer.  Good thing there's like, a million kids who all grew up on Harry Potter working on that stuff now.

@GoddersUK:  I don't know what the rule is for private photos, i.e. say of you at a party in your house, or someone else's house, but if someone did post them, you'd have to ask them to remove them, and if they didn't comply, you'd have to sue them ... not sure about the laws concerning such circumstances.

@GoddersUK: You live in the UK, surely you know that if you are in a public place, I can record and post images of you if I wish.  And when people do use these types of devices, eventually they will record everything, all the time, ever, and put it in the cloud, making some things public and some things not.

58 seconds ago, figuerres wrote

*snip*

wha .... um well a "memory" normally when I see that word or hear that word in general use means something from the human brain.   digital recordings stored on some form of computer system are not "memories" they are files that have data.

so I do not think this is about rights to anyone's "memories" , it's audio and video created my the use of a device and then what rights they should have to them

If you disagree that computer memory is an extension of human memory, then why are these memories made if not for humans to use?  It is not going to be far off, that people will have computer memory integrated into their biological memories.

3 minutes ago, davewill wrote

@Richard.Hein: Choice is key.  Unfortunately some not so nice people take information bypassing choice.  Choice has consequences as it always has.  But when others take the information without your choice who suffers the consequences now?  What happens to the balance?

I'm afraid you don't have a choice when it comes to allowing other people into your presence in public places nor do you have a choice whether they look at you or remember your face, or publish pictures of you if you are in a public place.  Even if you are in private with another individual, I think we've probably all had pictures that were less than flattering make it online, even if it's just a bad photo, and it's annoying, but what can you do?

1 minute ago, cbae wrote

@Richard.Hein: I don't think the issue has to do with whether or not an individual has a right to recall past memories, perfectly or otherwise. The issue has to do with the ease in which those memories can be distributed to others.

Honestly, I don't like the idea of people recording and publishing embarrassing or incriminating stuff about me, anymore than anyone else would, but how could it ever be anything else than a culture of mutual fear of reprisal that would ever stop it?  Unless you could put some kind of protection that requires everyone you are recording to give explicit permission for you to transfer some "memory", how could you ever stop it?  If our children and grandchildren grow up in an "always recording" state, then they probably won't even care.  The only plausible deniability that something happened would be to claim it's edited or CGI, and then the tools should be so good, who knows? 

EDIT:

Let's specifically think about memory sharing.  How could preventing certain memories from being shared ever be a right thing to do?  If you share a secret, you trust a person not to tell.  If they break that trust, then you don't trust them again.  You flag them as a betrayer of trust and everyone knows. 

If you watch a movie and share that memory with perfect recall, such that it's equivalent to another person watching that movie themselves, what right does the copyright holder have to your memory or your right to share that memory?