States as in US? Because if that’s the case, this won’t be illegal in any way shape or form.
I don’t understand why people think there is some law out there that supersedes the first amendment which unambiguously protects video recording in anything other than a bathroom, changing room, or the like.
Even in private property doesn’t have a law stating you can’t record, it’s just that you are likely to be trespassed if you break a private establishments no recording policy.
Sure, but the store isn't posting those videos on social media for people to comment on. If they were, they'd probably get sued, and for good reason.
I mean, the rest of your comment aside, this isn’t the case. You are in public. In fact, you’re “in public” in a private establishment, with which you have an assumed agreement to be recorded and for that recording to be used in any way the company sees fit.
There are thousands of recordings of people from security cameras on YouTube. From Walmart to tiny gas stations, all being used to farm interactions. One channel I’ve seen puts up explicitly videos of people stealing from them.
None of that can be sued over. Or more accurately, it wouldn’t be a successful suit. Because there is no expectation of privacy in public.
Most places disagree with you. You walking down the street means you’re walking in front of doorbell cameras, dash cams, general surveillance cameras, the guy shooting a tick tock video, and more.
Someone wearing glasses that record isn’t any more invasive than any of those, is it?
Yeah, I do this all the time actually. Grocery shopping and the wife wants to FaceTime? Shirt pocket. No one even gives it a first glance, never mind second.
You realize that one break connection being dead on a wired connection doesn’t mean the whole system takes a crap, right?
If your hydraulic line takes a shit, you’ve gotta clamp it or you eventually don’t have breaks. If an electrical wire disconnects, the electrons don’t fall out, the system throws a warning/error and the other breaks keep working.
So, I get where you’re going with this. There’s a problem with it though, albeit one that shouldn’t necessarily discourage the idea. Starlink and such devices can be found when in use. It’s not a passive connection, you need to send data out.
In fact, I believe an individual was convicted in Iran for using starlink recently?
You’d need a forceful reason for governments to leave the people/connections alone.
Satellite can also be disrupted instead of destroyed. Though that’s admittedly a little difficult to accomplish at the scale of an entire country.
While I agree, I can’t think of a practical way to ensure this beyond direct physical intervention. Which I admit may have been what you meant, but it sounded more like “we need to make it impossible to block the internet at a technical level”.
? What even is this, they asked what options there were, I gave them my opinion, and you’re jumping down my throat for not giving the only partially open source option.
Wait, isn’t the EU generally chock full of surveillance? Including some member countries going so far as to have facial recognition as a norm?