Want to know when I publish the next blog?
Smile and say cheese… But, ♫...hey, you, ♫ get off of my cloud…
Why...
Do we take photos we never really intend to keep? It was reported that during 1990 we took 57 billion photos; for 2015 it’s estimated we will take one trillion! In fact 10% of all photos ever taken were in the last twelve months; every two minutes we take more photos than the entire first 80 years of photography…but of what? And where are they? Well three trillion are on some cloud, to be stored forever and rarely viewed. But what the hell is the cloud? Will the sun come along one day and burn it away? In the 1970’s a questionnaire asked if there was a fire and you could save one thing, most chose their photograph album. Yet now we entrust those cherished memories to some electronic jiggery-pokery none of us understand. If the cloud ever disappears so will our past.
Digital storage has become like the ‘lock-up’ we keep furniture in. We hang onto this stuff in the belief that one day we will use the hideous mirror from Auntie Mary or look at that picture of a drunk in a sombrero in Malaga, mooning at the camera. Of course we never will... unless that young man becomes famous; then it’s who wants to pay?
...and another thing
I don’t have huge sympathy for ‘famous people’ who tweet and twitter and would go to the ‘opening’ of a new fridge, yet bleat they want privacy. Some stars do not actively court publicity and try to retain a personal life. Yet every inadvertent pick of the nose, surreptitious pee behind a hedge or ogle at cleavage or crotch is nowadays bound to be captured for eternity by some snap-happy owner of a cell phone. Where do you draw the line?
Recently in the UK, a lady was followed into a supermarket by a man intent of taking pictures of her bottom. He was not actually breaking the law! She was in a public place so was not entitled to the protection of the law of invasion of privacy or being stalked by a voyeur. I understand that the puddle of humanity called the Paparazzi need to make a living, but surely for people who are not in the public eye, their privacy is in fact their person. Is it really any different from recording a conversation? You cannot do that without telling the other party and certainly cannot play it back to others. Why not the same simple rule for photos?
Meanwhile my bottom in jeans or chinos is available for photographs at $50 a pop… or click…
...and another thing
The ‘click’ in a digital camera is of course just a sound effect but it does at least alert third parties they are being photo’d. The manufacturers really put it there to help us from crossing over from film driven cameras, reminding us of the old shutter mechanism that gave that click. However you can now silence your phone as you furtively work the camera under a dinner table and take photos of your fellow diners’ underwear! What a world! It’s not as if there isn’t enough free porn out there to satisfy every whim and whimsy.
...and another thing
Revenge porn (when one partner throws up onto the internet sexually explicit images of their ex-lover) makes even the Paparazzi look moral. If I had my way culprits would all be sent to a good vivisectionist! In lieu of that…. being made to stand naked on a cold mountain top and recite all of Shakespeare’s sonnets while being videoed might also be a suitable punishment.
However the point here is once a digital image has been posted there is no safety net. If you must be filmed doing things you’d rather not have a billion people see, use a Polaroid. People who subscribe to safe sites such as Snapchat, now know things can be hacked. As for the 40 million people with secrets on Ashleymadison.com, I reckon any half decent blackmailer would get $100 each for the details, or $10,000 for the top 1%. Either way that’s $4billion reasons why you may not want anything private on the web or in that cloud! Smile please… say cheese!
Wow!! How true this really is. . .gives reason to ponder. Maybe “das handy” is too handy?
So right !! My views precisely. And what about the selfie !!