
When Art, Apple and the Secret Service Collide: 'People Staring at Computers' - ajdecon
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/07/people-staring-at-computers/all/
======
bradleyland
I never really understood why Kyle was so confused about the negative
reactions. For someone who tried to be so in tune with people's feelings, he
seemed to be missing something incredibly obvious: violation of expectation.

Yes, when you're in public you have no _legal_ expectation of privacy.
However, when you're using a computer at an Apple store, you're also not
expecting that the webcam is snapping photos of you that will be posted
online.

What he misses entirely is that what constitutes "legal" is not entirely
congruent with social norms. Especially as it relates to what will happen to
us in public. Legality defines the hard boundaries of our social expectations.
We normally set those boundaries at a point where someone is "harmed". The
broad social contract is that we won't trample all over each other, physically
or emotionally, so we establish laws at the boundaries. Cross the boundary and
you face punishment.

For example, it's not illegal to take photos of people on the street, yet US
society has a love-hate relationship with the paparazzi. They're not breaking
the law, but there are plenty of people who... uh... _strongly dislike_ them.
Kyle crossed over in to the same territory. Not illegal, but definitely
hanging out on the fringes of socially acceptably behavior.

~~~
hollerith
Yeah, Kyle seems to be missing some sort of social intelligence that most
people possess -- or maybe career incentives make him choose to ignore or
rationalize away what his social intelligence is telling him about how people
are going to react.

EDIT: removed sentence that probably overstepped HN norms around meanness.

~~~
apitaru
[edit: retracted as per parent request]

~~~
hollerith
You're right. Offending sentence deleted from grandparent.

Although I understand that you are under no social or ethical obligation to do
so, I would appreciate your deleting your quote of the sentence.

------
Terretta
All the new traffic lights in our area have webcams pointed directly into the
windshield of drivers stopped for the light. To what end, I don't know. But
drivers on their way to the Apple store don't seem to mind their pictures
being taken.

It seems Kyle's mistake was in publishing the results of surveillance. We
don't care if we are watched, because we don't have to form a belief in the
reality of the images stored. We do care if we see ourselves published,
because that makes the reality of being watched undeniable.

Consider for comparison the TSA body scanner images being seen to be seen by
agents at the scanner, versus not seen being seen by agents in a room.
Passengers were not ok with the first, but ok with the second.

These examples offer a roadmap to a happily ignored surveillance society.

~~~
joezydeco
_"All the new traffic lights in our area have webcams pointed directly into
the windshield of drivers stopped for the light. To what end, I don't know"_

They could be webcams but the more common explanation is that they are visual
sensors to detect cars in the turning lane, replacing the old wire loops in
the pavement:

<http://www.plan-bravo.com/lefty.html>

~~~
ams6110
They are not just to detect cars in the turning lanes but to detect whether
cars are waiting for the light, and how long the queue is. This (supposedly)
helps optimize traffic flow. I have my doubts as to whether it works any
better than fixed timers. The claim that they are cheaper and easier to
maintain than in-ground wire loops does seem believable.

~~~
epochwolf
It works better during off hours when there is little traffic.

------
whyenot
What was he expecting? Surely he must have realized that Apple would be upset
that he secretly installed software on their computers to spy on their
employees and customers. Surely he must have understood that many of his
subjects would be weird-ed out as well. I don't understand what he thought
would happen. He doesn't seem to have any empathy at all. Hopefully this
encounter has woken him up a little.

------
puerto
It's pretty clear why Kyle hasn't anticipated this kind of reaction to his
project. After exposing his whole life online during his previous projects, he
obviously lost kind of sensitivity most people have about their own privacy.
He studied some laws and rules and decided it's OK, but it would be better if
he asked some of his non privacy-stunt-artist friends what do they think about
his idea. His story nicely shows how our ideas of ethics are influenced by our
own personality and behavior, not just out environment.

------
zheng
Good read. My biggest question is why didn't the artist just ask the apple
store if it would be ok to install an app that took photos instead of asking
if it would be ok to take photos? My guess is he knew they would say no, but I
could be wrong. There is two sides to every story, but Apple doesn't come out
smelling very good here.

~~~
epoxyhockey
I once walked into a semi-fast food restaurant and kindly asked if I could
take a photo of their menu board. The employee said 'no' with no additional
explanation given. Ever since then, I've taken similar photos -without asking-
and no one has ever questioned me. It seems like the phrase, _it's better to
ask for forgiveness_ , applies to the situation.

I feel that when you ask an employee for permission, they automatically assume
that you are up to something negative. They are usually not in a position of
authority to grant you access to anything anyway. Now that you asked for their
permission, they feel like they are personally responsible for whatever you do
with the photos. The easiest way for them to CYA is for them to say "no."

~~~
rurounijones
I agree that is it usually the path of least resistance but "Ask for
forgiveness" is much harder when you are having to ask forgiveness from high
priced corporate legal rottweilers and the secret service who want to nail you
to a wall.

For things like restaurant menu boards I wouldn't be worried. Installing apps
on computers I do not own (and owned by a very large corporation) without
explicit permission? Not so much

~~~
GauntletWizard
But what constitutes installing an app? If I sit there at a python prompt, is
that "Installing an app"? If I write some applescript there and then, is that
"Installing an app"? If I grab something for free from the Mac App store, is
that "Installing an app"? Every one of those is a just and reasonable thing to
do.

I'd even say the most clear definition, Downloading an app from an external
website and executing it, is pretty clearly in the allowed list - These
machines exist to demonstrate Apple computers, and _Installing an app_ is a
not entirely unheard of action after purchasing. There's a reasonable
expectation that Apple could prevent it if they wanted, and that the 'harm'
done to them is virtually zero - They re-image their machines all the time. So
where is the boundary?

Obviously, in this case, it's where people started feeling creeped out by
it... but this was by no means a secret service investigation. This was a
high-school level prank, and it saddens me that we live in a world where
people would take enough offense - where people are so mistrustful of one
another - where people are so litigious, that federal law enforcement is
called in after such.

~~~
rurounijones
You are correct, defining it in a manner acceptable to legal types would be
very very hard.

However the fact that he felt he needed to hide what he was doing by using
tumblr etc makes me feel that he knew there was a line (however blurry it
might be) and that he was crossing it.

------
andreyf
My biggest surprise is that nobody at the Apple store noticed that the camera
lights were on for all (most?) of the computers in the store... wouldn't that
be kind of obvious?

~~~
biafra
Is it possible to have the built in camera record without having the green
recording indicator lid up? With or without modifying the device driver for
the camera?

~~~
showerst
I believe that it depends on the model, but after some of the early trojans
figured out how to do this years ago, the light is now hardware-wired in some
webcams.

[http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6758/can-
webcams...](http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6758/can-webcams-be-
turned-on-without-the-indicator-light)

------
sneak
Somebody's a total jackass (and obviously hasn't watched the Don't Talk To The
Police video).

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc>

------
xbryanx
Interested in another of Kyle's wacky projects (mentioned in the article)?
Check out the year of his life where he logged ever single keystroke on his
computer to Twitter. Yep...all of it.

<http://twitter.com/keytweeter>

~~~
spot
almost all. big difference. but yea, great project.

------
crasshopper
Some of the things Kyle said and quoted seem relevant to an earlier HN
discussion [1] titled I don't "get" art

"""

The Book of Tea[2]... requires a mutual understanding between the artist and
the spectator:

> The sympathetic communion of minds necessary for art appreciation must be
> based on mutual concession. The spectator must cultivate the proper attitude
> for receiving the message, as the artist must know how to impart it.

And the success of “People Staring at Computers” is based on condemnation
rather than mutual concession. In a way, inviting condemnation can be the most
effective way of imparting a message.

I think Duchamp understood the possibilities of condemnation as an alternative
to mutual concession. He addresses this in his short essay, “The Creative Act“
[3]. He says once an artist gives their work to the spectator, it’s up to the
spectator to make a decision about that work.

"""

Had this article come out at the same time, I think that discussion would have
gone better.

[1] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4124275>

[2] <http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/tea.htm>

[3]
[http://www.iaaa.nl/cursusAA&AI/duchamp.html](http://www.iaaa.nl/cursusAA&AI/duchamp.html)

------
keithpeter
Reminds me of Walker Evans

[http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=...](http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=52629)

Evans organised _publication_ of the images in book form, which I suppose
would render the publisher liable if any of the passengers wanted to seek any
form of redress (they did not).

In this case, Apple was the unwitting publisher with no editorial involvement,
hence the action seems reasonable.

------
gee_totes
Great article. I never thought about how much time I spend expressionless in
front of the computer before.

Maybe I'll add a mirror to my desk to make faces in throughout the day.

~~~
UnFleshedOne
Why? There is no reason to make faces if nobody sees them. Unless you think
your face muscles get weaker?

------
jibjaba
If Kyle is being honest in this article he is a sociopath, no question about
it. He obviously has major problems understanding social norms.

------
gits1225
The melancholic nature of the article and the easy going attitude of the
author really made the article different and original for me. I really liked
reading and thinking about the points raised in it. But really, all it was,
was revealing the one obvious aspect of human nature: how we react to objects.
Here its a computer.

 _When someone had your password, it’s not just that they could access any
information, but that they could become you._

 _When people send you an email, there is an expectation of privacy._

 _But most of the emails were from reporters and journalists. I wrote a form
response and started replying to everyone, letting them know the EFF had
encouraged me not to talk about it. This was a really difficult moment. I felt
like everything was arranged in a way to keep discussion limited, to keep
people working against each other instead of working together._

 _Hundreds and hundreds of comments, on dozens of major blogs. I’m no stranger
to publicity, but this was on a completely different scale. Everyone had an
opinion and wanted to argue with each other. Yet I had to remain completely
silent._

The above quotes when left to ponder are really profound. Pointing the easy to
notice things are indeed the easy to ignore.

 _In the other comments, I started to notice a trend: people were trying to
establish definitions. They were arguing about ethics and ontology (even
though no one called it that). The project hit a nerve that made people
uncomfortable enough that they had to share their opinions and argue their
positions. If you’re at school studying art, philosophy, or politics, this
isn’t a big deal. These discussions happen over lunch, or in the hallways. But
this was happening on the internet._

Everything and anything happens on the internet, and if there is no identity
attached to the actions, the truer they become of the person, than in real
life where people are bound to act by social commonsense.

 _With “People Staring at Computers,” I saw something new: a massive audience
engaged in a collective decision-making about the culture they wanted to
adopt, in realtime, via comment threads strewn across blog posts and news
articles_

Its not new. It started right when internet started. If some other way to mass
communicate was possible before, it would have started then as well.

------
josephcooney
If he thought what he was doing was 'right' (and that it was unreasonable for
apple to send the secret service after him) why did he buy a new laptop from
apple? That part to me seems the most insane.

~~~
DeepDuh
That's honestly something you will only understand after having used a macbook
for some while. There's tons of stuff Apple does that annoy me, especially
what comes out of their legal team. I always check out the new gear from other
manufacturers. Nothing quite cuts it. Of course this is all subjective and
depends on the characteristics about a laptop you value most. If it's pure
performance or repairability they aren't right for you.

------
AaronStanely
No offense, but this author is an idiot. He should've given them nothing, and
said nothing, and requested a lawyer. He did exactly what the secret service
wanted him to do: to feel intimidated, scared, and willing to talk, since he's
innocent, right? That is precisely what they want you to do. Next time, say
nothing and request a lawyer.

~~~
andrewcooke
how would that have ended up better than the outcome described here?

