> It would be a bombshell revelation and you’d see it everywhere.
What a strange idea. From what I remember about the "privacy nightmare on wheels" disclosure [1], Americans have apparently already consented to being recorded at all times by simply being within range of cameras and microphones in cars they don't own, passengers consent to losing control of their DNA by sitting in the car, etc.
It's better for Europeans for the time being. But short of collaboration with extraterrestrials to beam up millions of New Yorkers for medical experiments next Tuesday, it's pretty hard to imagine at this point that any example of corporate abuse will qualify for "bombshell revelation" ever again. The overton window has well and truly shifted, and most people will basically argue with you that they enjoy the abuse.
> What a strange idea. From what I remember about the "privacy nightmare on wheels" disclosure [1], Americans have apparently already consented to being recorded at all times by simply being within range of cameras and microphones in cars they don't own,
Your memory is incorrect, or at least misguided. There's nothing special about cars, doing things in public places does not come with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The flip side of this debate is public photography: Should photographers (including people using their phone) lose their right to take photos in public places because they can't collect consent from everyone around to have their photo taken?
> passengers consent to losing control of their DNA by sitting in the car, etc.
I don't know where you're getting this one. It's definitely not supported by the article you linked.
> There's nothing special about cars, doing things in public places does not come with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
You're probably talking about pedestrians on the sidewalk (which I also disagree about) but are you going to say the interior of the car is not private? Why would a home be private if a car is not? Spying in the kitchen but not the bedroom? Spying in the bedroom as long as it's audio only? Is my backyard private? Is anything?
> I don't know where you're getting this one. It's definitely not supported by the article you linked.
Dig deeper then. I'd find the reference for you, but when you're confronted with it then you'll just probably just argue it's standard for shrinkwrapped "all rights reserved" kind of legalese and it doesn't matter that we're expected to tolerate this kind of bullshit because we don't have the technology to stick a DNA sequencer under the seat. But that's exactly the point. The abuse is SOP now and for whatever reason, some people will always make excuses for it.
What a strange idea. From what I remember about the "privacy nightmare on wheels" disclosure [1], Americans have apparently already consented to being recorded at all times by simply being within range of cameras and microphones in cars they don't own, passengers consent to losing control of their DNA by sitting in the car, etc.
It's better for Europeans for the time being. But short of collaboration with extraterrestrials to beam up millions of New Yorkers for medical experiments next Tuesday, it's pretty hard to imagine at this point that any example of corporate abuse will qualify for "bombshell revelation" ever again. The overton window has well and truly shifted, and most people will basically argue with you that they enjoy the abuse.
[1] https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/privacy-nightmare-on-...