Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Vint Cerf: Media Tagging Can Be Disconcerting

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the you-are-here dept.

Google 96

coondoggie writes "Cerf says he profoundly feels the advent of cameras everywhere and the ability to post video and photos online can be hugely disconcerting. He recounts how he stepped once off a helicopter for a meeting in Brazil and minutes later was informed a video of himself doing that had been posted to YouTube, something he found to be a discomforting experience. He says getting constant notes about being 'tagged' in online photos from social networking sites such as Facebook still remains a bit of a jolt."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Think of the celebrities (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37704716)

Oh no, well known public figures are getting media attention! How unfair!

Simple solution. See the other story (2)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704720)

Here [slashdot.org] you learn what to do to avoid being tagged.

Re:Simple solution. See the other story (1)

Shrike82 (1471633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704900)

Good idea.

Better idea. [facebook.com]

Re:Simple solution. See the other story (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705312)

and from Michael Jackson.

Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37704736)

He isn't the first, and won't be the last.

Although one wonders why, if Vint Cerf was so uncomfortable, he would continue in roles that involve a lot of public exposure.

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (4, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704848)

Because at this point it's a moot point. Once the public knows who you are, there's no guarantee that you'll ever be able to arrange for yourself to be forgotten. It kind of reminds me of what I've heard about Greta Garbo, she did her last work in 1948 and spent the next 40 years or so being out of the spotlight. In the modern era, she'd be completely unable to maintain that as every time somebody did sight her there would be a tagged image on the net.

What personally concerns me is that it's not just celebrities that end up online like that, an increasing number of people are posted and tagged by friends and complete strangers without any control. Just look at the people of walmart site.

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704958)

Counterpoint: Gene Hackman.

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705018)

Counterpoint: Johnny Carson.

FTFM.

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37704992)

it's a moot point

what the hell does 4Chan have to do with this?!!

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705044)

Nothing, you do realize that the phrase predates 4Chan by quite a bit, right?

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 2 years ago | (#37708034)

Woosh

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (1)

zoloto (586738) | more than 2 years ago | (#37711934)

it was a horrible joke, if nothing more than a way to not contribute to the conversation here. fucking amateurs

What sucks is being famous, but not rich. (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705612)

Once the public knows who you are, there's no guarantee that you'll ever be able to arrange for yourself to be forgotten.

Right.

Being famous, but not rich, is a huge pain. (The reverse is rather nice, though.) If you have enough money, you can live behind gates. You can go out to places with door control. Or hang out in places with enough celebrities that nobody cares about you. (Malibu and Stanford come to mind.) If not, weirdos can be a real problem.

Second-tier TV actors run into this problem. They don't make enough for the celebrity lifestyle, but get recognized too much. After a while, though, they're forgotten.

Re:What sucks is being famous, but not rich. (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712220)

It really isn't that difficult not to be recognised in public. If you saw most film stars walking down the street on their own wearing baggy jeans, an old sweatshirt and a cheap baseball cap you'd probably walk right past them.

Most celebrities though, would probably die a little inside if this ever happened to them, so they continue hanging out in designer clothes at designer clubs and having designer relationships with other celebrities, then moaning when they're photographed.

For the few dozen people who know who Vint Cerf is, or care about where he's travelling to, what's the harm in videoing him getting off a helicopter? It was presumably publicly available information where he was anyway.

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (3, Interesting)

Ghostworks (991012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706112)

The trouble here is that the threshold for "celebrity" is becoming alarmingly low. The idea that you choose cede a certain amount of privacy when you choose to become highly visible -- and make no mistake, this is ALSO a very new notion in human history -- doesn't really make sense as cameras become omnipresent, and all media is instantly shared. Tagging is really just a mechanism for allowing that sharing, but the sharing plus the tidal wave of recordings is what marks a change.

You can use the "chosen celebrity" argument when you claim you have no sympathy for the privacy woes of, say, Demi Moore. But what about Rebecca Black? Jessi Slaughter? If a webcam and two minutes of 4chan's attention is all you need to become an internet celebrity or pariah, isn't that setting the bar pretty damn low?

In this case, Vint Cerf is a celebrity. To someone. Pretty much everyone can be called "a celebrity to someone" if you talk about a narrow enough circle of interests. Andy Warhol used to talk about everyone's 15 minutes. These days people like to talk about the 1000 True Fans that better networking allows. It all boils down to a lowered barrier between invisible private life and highly visible public life. Untagging yourself is never an option at this level. You're trying to do work to cancel the work of many more people (fans and friends), using many services, some of which you may not know about, all believing that they are the very least acting harmlessly. In this case, Cerf has basically just been good at his job, and outspoken in promoting History's Next Great Thing that he was lucky enough to be around for. Does that really justify publicizing every part of his public life? If so, what does that say for competent, ambitious workers of the future? Are the options really "get comfortable on camera or don't participate in society"?

Pretty much all privacy cases involving governments devolve into the arguments that to be able to spy is to spy (whether spying is actively being done right now or not). In civil cases, it comes down to whether the aggrieved had a reasonable expectation of privacy, "reasonable" being established by an average person from the greater community. In an existential way, it must be a bit terrifying to one of his generation that an entire younger generation has grown comfortable with, and actually embraces a level of self-surveillance the Stasi wouldn't even be able to dream of.

Re:Celebrities uncomfortable with their celebrity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37708236)

There are "celebrities" (Lohan, Spears, Jolie, Pitt, Gaga etc) and people who are well known *in certain groups*. 90% of the general public has no idea who Cerf is.

Twenty years ago, people chased the typical hollywood celebrity around to get a pic to sell to People magazine etc, but nobody followed a person like Cerf around. But that is changing a little, at least at the more 'elite' levels. Cameras are ubiquitous and photos/videos don't cost anything, where back in the day they did, and of course putting up information about such people on a website is cheap, compared to print media. "Computer and networking pioneers" magazine with "Vint Cerf PICS INSIDE!" on the cover would not have been a successful magazine in 1991.

He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1, Insightful)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704750)

"He recounts how he stepped once off a helicopter for a meeting in Brazil and minutes later was informed a video of himself doing that had been posted to YouTube, something he found to be a discomforting experience."

So he doesn't like being a celebrity. This isn't exactly new to the human experience. The rate at which the information travels is somewhat new, but Vint is one of the men responsible for that condition, and he did it intentionally.

I have no sympathy for this concern.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704864)

I don't think it's fair to expect him to foresee the basic invention he worked on being used in conjunction with technology he had nothing to do with.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (2)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704880)

It would have been funnier if it had been Tim Berners-Lee or one of the symantic web metadata folksomonies ontology web2.0 visionaries bitching about being tagged.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

hey (83763) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705142)

Yeah, I hate when that happens to me (a nobody).

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705590)

I agree with your specific concern (or lack thereof), but Cerf's specific concern is still valid. I especially find the take-it-or-leave it attitude of some british subjects with regard to CCTV very disconcerting. What does it take to get people to see a problem with thier government?

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (2)

PoopCat (2218334) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706736)

What does it take to get people to see a problem with thier government?

Education.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712460)

What does it take to get people to see a problem with thier government?

Education.

For most of us the major problem with our government isn't the number of speed cameras we have

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37715430)

I ate a sea urchin once. It tasted salty. That has as much to do with the OP's comment as your remark.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712452)

I agree with your specific concern (or lack thereof), but Cerf's specific concern is still valid. I especially find the take-it-or-leave it attitude of some british subjects with regard to CCTV very disconcerting. What does it take to get people to see a problem with thier government?

I love how someone getting photograpned getting off a helicopter in Brazil becomes the fault of English CCTV. They do say that paranoia is just the mirror image of total disassociation, an attempt to force an incomprehensible reality into simplistic mental pigeon holes.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715092)

I love how someone getting photograpned getting off a helicopter in Brazil becomes the fault of English CCTV.

No where in that post is that said.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705758)

Your username says it all; you are a selfish asshole.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (2)

Anonymus (2267354) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707930)

An extremely traumatic and terrible event happened to my wife and I last year. It was front page news in several newspapers, with our full names, our jobs, and other background information about us. When my wife's unique name is googled, it comes up in the first page of results. Neither one of us is even remotely famous, interesting, or worthy of attention in any way, and this was not something that we did or caused.

This has nothing to do with celebrity other than that a celebrity is complaining. Society hasn't quite caught up to the internet yet, and there are some very fucked up things that can happen thanks to the inability for information to be lost/forgotten/hard-to-find, and for information about individuals to be unleashed into that system without those individuals wanting or intending it to be there. Maybe someday society will be able to handle it better, but in the meantime it's worth talking about and trying to deal with, rather than just dismissing it as not having sympathy (by which you really mean empathy) for someone.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712566)

An extremely traumatic and terrible event happened to my wife and I last year. It was front page news in several newspaper

If you are involved in a newsworthy story, you can't really blame the media for reporting on it. If as an innocent bystander/participant you want to be left alone, just don't encourage them, don't give interviews, they will soon move onto something else.

I really don't see what else you can expect if you have any sort of free press, provided the media don't break any privacy laws your country may have.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

donutz (195717) | more than 2 years ago | (#37715020)

The problem, of course, is that "newsworthy" == "whatever train wreck gets us the most viewers for our advertisers". When it comes to actual useful information, facts, context and statistics, you may as well forget the news media.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

arisvega (1414195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37711652)

[..] about being 'tagged' in online photos from social networking sites such as Facebook [..]

If you have a Facebook account, you can remove the tags of you from pictures. If you have no account, there will be no tags.

Since this guy is apparently some kind of celebrity that enjoys "stepping out of helicopters in front of cameras", what's his problem?

I 'll tell you what his problem is: the mainstream media, he can handle. Mainstream media has been a close minded self-centered social club with total control as to who gets publicity- few groups, a few cameras, ONE transmission antenna, millions of passive receivers. But now facebook-like and youtube-like entities take that well-established control away. So when you are "setting up" to address the public, things are not so much under your control any more, and there is no absolute control over capturing and editing, so the "illusion" you are trying to sell to the public may be flawed.

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (1)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712532)

Since this guy is apparently some kind of celebrity

Sounds like you don't know who Vint Cerf is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vint_Cerf [wikipedia.org]
Vinton Gray "Vint" Cerf (born June 23, 1943) is an American computer scientist, who is recognized as one of "the fathers of the Internet"...

Surely you've heard of "Cerfing the Internet".

Re:He doesn't like being a celebrity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37721816)

OK, so now I know who he is, why should I give a fuck what he thinks?

People who invent or contribute something are rarely able to see the long term implications of their work

(Einstein and QM springs to mind).

The Architect (5, Funny)

cachimaster (127194) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704764)

He looks too important.
Maybe people would cease to tag him if he didn't look like the Architect from Matrix.

Re:The Architect (1)

ocdscouter (1922930) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707844)

In all honesty, I'm seriously thinking more Ben Bernanke.

Re:The Architect (1)

pipedwho (1174327) | more than 2 years ago | (#37708004)

They only ever made one Matrix film... and I don't remember any Architect.

Re:The Architect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37710364)

I kept hoping they would have made a nice sequel to it. It seemed like an interesting world to explore. O well similar to Highlander, just a 1 hit movie wonder.

IP on Everything (1)

kriston (7886) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704768)

Well, Dr. Cerf, you're the one who said "IP on Everything."

http://gfx.dagbladet.no/pub/artikkel/5/51/518/518800/ip_on_everything_1195570027.jpg [dagbladet.no]

Re:IP on Everything (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704870)

I thought that was R. Kelly's defense?

Re:IP on Everything (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705040)

*cue laughtrack*

Breaking News! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37704792)

Old person frightened by future! Details at 11!

Re:Breaking News! (1)

EvilBudMan (588716) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705030)

Wait till you get old. Change is bad. Well some of it anyhow like the unemployment rate especially among young people. It's a wonder they don't riot.

Re:Breaking News! (1)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705106)

"I used to be with it, but then they changed what *it* was. Now what I'm with isn't *it*, and what's *it* seems weird and scary to me. It'll happen to you... "

--Grandpa Simpson

Re:Breaking News! (1)

EvilBudMan (588716) | about 2 years ago | (#37766344)

Ain't that the truth sorta. I guess change can really be good or bad depending on what it is. If I suddenly won the lottery for ten million dollars, that would be good. If I lost my baby puppy that would be bad.

We could go on with this. Want to know the difference between theory and reality? Probably heard that one.

Re:Breaking News! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705840)

Young person thinks all change is good change and is unavoidable. Fucking news at eleven.

Re:Breaking News! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37706856)

Fucking news? I know I haven't been to Naked News in a while, but I was unaware they'd advanced quite that much.

Scary Future (2)

byteherder (722785) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704842)

What is scary about this technology is that anyone will be able to tag anyone else and follow them any where they go.

With Facebook, plus facial recognition, plus public video, plus tagging, I can follow/cyberstalk anyone from anywhere.

Welcome to the world where everyone is your Big Brother.

Re:Scary Future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37704960)

Who's going to bother doing all that tagging? Boring stuff.

Re:Scary Future (1)

misterooga (1172837) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705348)

I think the app will do that for you, via facial recognition feature and etc. All you have to do will be to take a picture on a phone.

Re:Scary Future (2)

meta-monkey (321000) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706298)

Designer masks will be the fashion statement of the future. For when you want to be seen but not recognized.

Re:Scary Future (1)

xclr8r (658786) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705918)

people who like to categorize stuff. Librarians and OCD types come to mind.

Re:Scary Future (1)

byteherder (722785) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706296)

There will be an app for that. Click on the picture of the person and then on the auto-tagging app on your iPhone and that's it.

Re:Scary Future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37718340)

I agree this makes stalking so much easier. It can get really cold out in those bushes and sometimes you end up kneeling in dog shit.

It is not... (4, Insightful)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704874)

It is not when technology correctly tags you that is scary.

It is when technology incorrectly tags you that it is scary.

Re:It is not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705426)

Like when you are tagged as a chair or stain on the wall or somebodies arm fat.

Re:It is not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37709062)

... and then one of your friends has to confirm their identity by identifying that arm fat or stain as you...

Re:It is not... (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707150)

Both are scary, because it's not the technology you should be afraid of but the power using that technology. So if you are tagged as something (Jew/Communist/Terrorist/rich), if you are tagged correctly, depending what side of history you are on, you can be then targeted for whatever purpose.

Tagging is worthless by itself, it's the targeting application that gives it value.

Video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37704896)

Anyone have a tagged video of him saying that? ;)

At least he knew about it... (3, Insightful)

stillnotelf (1476907) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704914)

I don't much care to be tagged on Facebook, etc, but from TFS:

He says getting constant notes about being 'tagged' in online photos

At least he knows he's getting tagged - the tags you don't know about are a lot worse. The ones you know about you can delete or plan for. The privacy invasion you are unaware of is worse than the one you know about.

Re:At least he knew about it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705212)

The privacy invasion you are unaware of is worse than the one you know about.

Paranoia and fear! Your best defenses against THEM* since time immemorial!

*: Oh, you know who I'm talking about. Oh, yes. Unless you're one of them, too. Are you? Oh, shit, I better make this AC...

Re:At least he knew about it... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712618)

As one of your alien lizard overlords, I find your attitude...disturbing.

We have tagged you as a potential threat, what happens next is entirely up to you.

CCTV (1)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#37704978)

I find it fascinating the autotagging feature in Facebook, which manages to guess the subject right a surprising amount of the time. I can see where this could have uses elsewhere. Let's say, autotagging the output of government street CCTV. Imagine a page where your image pops up automatically every time software recognizes your face. Probably used first with celebrities and (opposing) politicians. There might come a day when you can buy a service, put in your child's name and get a dump of all the traffic cams that contain his image. And no, that won't be abused at all...

Re:CCTV (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37705012)

The bad thing about that is that you don't necessarily have any idea as to whether you have grounds to sue Facebook or not. I don't have an account, but even if I did, I'm sure there are plenty of accounts where pictures of me could theoretically filter to. Either passed around chain letter style or lifted from other sites.

I doubt that is the case, but I don't have any way of knowing. At this point, there really does need to be some consequences for companies like FB that profit from such invasion of privacy.

Re:CCTV (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37706994)

Autotagging works in Facebook, because it's matching your friend list, which is probably the size of a small town. In real life, facial recognition has a huge false positive rate making it largely useless.

Re:CCTV (1)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707730)

> Autotagging works in Facebook, because it's matching your friend list, which is probably the size of a small town. In real life, facial recognition has a huge false positive rate making it largely useless.

That's actually good news.

My Facebook friends list is more like a ghost town. I don't friend anyone I don't know personally. As a consequence, where others may have enough Facebook friends to fill a basketball stadium, I have about enough to field a team, if there aren't too many substitutions.

Transparent society... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705064)

... the thing is the growth of tech just makes society more transparent. So if you become an important/followed/popular figure you can expect it. You can't hide in an age where communication costs are near zero and travel near the speed of light.

Poor guy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705066)

I feel so bad.

I know the feeling (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705160)

I just finished banging my G/F and a few minutes later I get a phone call from some guy saying he just got a video of me banging his wife. Then a half an hour later some kids show up going on about a video of me banging their mom. It's all just a little too much.

Re:I know the feeling (1)

byteherder (722785) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706356)

Was that you?

Re:I know the feeling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37710296)

so then a little while later her husband shows up with a lawyer, and has me watching the video on his laptop and instead of the video of me banging my girlfried i'm watching a video of me watching a video with her husband and lawyer watchiing a video of me banging my girfriend.

Re:I know the feeling (1)

Mubbers (1351699) | more than 2 years ago | (#37710926)

Giggity giggity!

Re:I know the feeling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37711604)

I'm that woman's father. You were banging my daughter, fscker!

Grow Up, Vint (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705188)

Here's the "discomforting" video [youtube.com] . Keep in mind he's not just some random attendee to that ICANN conference - he was the friggin' chairman of the board, arriving in the least subtle way possible. And now he's bothered that some fan noticed...

Re:Grow Up, Vint (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37707054)

Vint Cerf: Note to self

Should have thought about it when desiging TCP/IP.

ps: too late!

Re:Grow Up, Vint (1)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712548)

Here's the "discomforting" video [youtube.com] . Keep in mind he's not just some random attendee to that ICANN conference - he was the friggin' chairman of the board, arriving in the least subtle way possible. And now he's bothered that some fan noticed...

... and it's only been viewed 571 times in five years!

Re:Grow Up, Vint (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712646)

He forgot to have the Ride of the Valkyries blaring out of the chopper, so it's possible a few people missed his arrival.

i wish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705498)

i wish people would stop worrying so much about facebook's privacy. i would be more concerned about googles. why?

because facebook is an analytic solution to a data gathering problem. and, as we all know, analytic solutions are obtained only for a small subset of initial values. in the case of facebook, they have created this splendid "social graph" and using your profile hash as a basis, can perform various combinatorial operations on the graph in order to find information about what you connect to, what you said, whatever. but without that unique hash, they are screwed totally. furthermore, this simplistic, rigid data structure means they are essentially hemmed in: if they want to move into probability theory, for example, they cant, or at least, they will do a crappy job at it.

google on the other hand has vastly vastly superior algorithms, and represent numerical solutions to the data gathering problem, generalizing data sets such as facebooks with ease. combined with advanced statistics, they have approached the data gathering problem in a concise and logical way that scares the shit out of me.

Re:i wish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37706462)

There is a special key on your keyboard called Shift. Check it out sometime, and your messages won't look like they came from a 13 year old.

Privacy is dying, but can we adapt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705672)

It won't be long before everything we do and say, and in a further future possibly even everything we think, will be open to everyone. But we will probably still be more or less the beings we are now. Can we adapt? And more importantly, will we be able to like it? We are toying with the ways in which people relate to each other more fundamentally than ever before, but at the same time we are doing it at a much faster pace than before. If we were to find out that the new future is horrid, we could find ourselves facing a fait accompli.

Untag yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37705834)

If you don't like being tagged, just untag yourself. It's not a big deal.
It's like if you get email you don't want - just delete it. Not a big deal.

I thought what I'd do was... (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706274)

...I'd pretend I was one of those deaf mutes.

The Light Of Other Days (2)

dotwhynot (938895) | more than 2 years ago | (#37706448)

A privacy free future envisioned: The Light Of Other Days, by Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter. http://www.sfsite.com/06a/lod82.htm [sfsite.com]

In other news... (1)

Sentrion (964745) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707114)

The Amish still consider it a violation of their rights for others to photograph them.

Re:In other news... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712694)

The Amish still consider it a violation of their rights for others to photograph them.

Psychologically, they'd be quite at home on slashdot. Which is somewhat ironic.

Is Vint Cerf even relevant? (1)

pongo000 (97357) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707458)

I seem to recall him predicting the end of the Internet as we know it with the advent of alternate DNS roots in response to the ICANN hegemony. Still waiting for that sky to fall, Vint. Now we see he makes the front page of /. because he finds current technology "disconcerting."

I would appear Dr. Cerf's boat sailed a long time ago, and he's still standing on the pier waiting to board.

Re:Is Vint Cerf even relevant? (1)

smellotron (1039250) | more than 2 years ago | (#37709380)

I would appear Dr. Cerf's boat sailed a long time ago, and he's still standing on the pier waiting to board.

He was supposed to be on the same one as Bilbo.

The first rule of Animal Farm is .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37707530)

1984 is now Vint. Get with the program.

Tagging (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707538)

What exactly is tagging? I hear it mentioned but not being on Facebook I can only guess what it is. Ie, someone puts a picture on their site and captions it as "Me and Bob and Susan in Yosemite". Why would Bob and Susan get spam when this happens?

Re:Tagging (1)

pipedwho (1174327) | more than 2 years ago | (#37708126)

So Bob and Susan have an opportunity to add a comment to the photo like: "LOL! You never should have put your hand into that beehive!"

Re:Tagging (1)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37712590)

What exactly is tagging? I hear it mentioned but not being on Facebook I can only guess what it is. Ie, someone puts a picture on their site and captions it as "Me and Bob and Susan in Yosemite". Why would Bob and Susan get spam when this happens?

Then Fred sends Bob a note saying "What the heck are you doing with my wife, Susan?"
And George sends Bob a note saying "I saw you with Susan. Need a divorce lawyer, Bob?"
and Harry sends Bob a note saying "Bob, you're fired. You shouldn't have called in sick."

And to clarify, the tagging is marking people in photos, not just captioning them. You mark the part of the photo that the person is in. And then you designate the person by specific ID. So then, as Bob's future employer, I can check on Bob, and see all the photos of Bob, one after another, that were posted by other people.

It's more of a privacy issue than a spam issue.

Oh really? (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 2 years ago | (#37707880)

Maybe Vint should keep his trap shut for a while instead of trumpeting "the father of Internet", eh?

helicopter? (1)

nitehawk214 (222219) | more than 2 years ago | (#37709000)

A guy takes a helicopter to a meeting is lecturing us on what is normal?

I am aware that Timothy doesn't read comments made (1)

apparently (756613) | more than 2 years ago | (#37709998)

to the articles he posts.

I am aware that he doesn't even read the content of the submissions he posts.

I am 100% aware of this.

I am an atheist.

And yet I pray, I pray to the fucking universe, to the space-time continuum, and to faster-than-light neutrons, that Timothy reads this comment and enrolls himself in a goddamned fucking community college Writing 101 course.

coondoggie writes "Cerf says he profoundly feels the advent of cameras everywhere and the ability to post video and photos online can be hugely disconcerting

Who the fuck is "Cerf" Timothy? How can you possibly not realize what a poor summary that is? What exactly does it feel like to fail upward? Does it feel like floating? Is that why you don't give a shit about your one and only job here: goddamned fucking editing?

privacy evaporating slowly (1)

Onymous Coward (97719) | more than 2 years ago | (#37710054)

More data goes online every day, even aside from what we put there ourselves, data sourced a myriad ways, ways multiplying constantly. It's a(n ever more) digital life.

There's no pulling the plug. There's only learning to cope. It's just fact that our lives, the lives of everyone, grow ever more transparent.

So, how will we adjust?

He's just conserned about universal causality (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#37716714)

His situation today is disconcerting. Tomorrow he'll be browsing around on youtube and click a video at random. It'll be a video of him watching a video of him watching a video of him.....on youtube.

Next step annihilates the universe in a puff of logic. Or it becomes the sequel to Spaceballs.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>