News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView. Parent comment

Re:Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView by jMyles on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @12:08PM (#12344830)
> child pornography is just a time series of pictures right?

But presumably it's not the capturing of the photons that is criminal in the case of child pornography. Even if you used a fake camera, it's still illegal, right?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView by colejohnson66 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @01:09PM (#12345321)
I'd assume that's just child exploitation/molestation, not pornography. But that's just me.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView by jMyles on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @01:35PM (#12345609)
Right right.

Well, then, I suppose what I'm saying is: in an information-age society, it's the child exploitation/molestation that's properly a crime; capturing the same as a piece of media is no modifier.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView by xyzzy123 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @08:26PM (#12348848)
But the media itself is illegal to posess. Some images / videos are Ok, some are not. Moral judgement is involved.

What I am saying is, if society wants to, it can totally declare that some pictures / videos are ok and some are not. This already happens all the time.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Privacy Implications for OpenStreetView by jMyles on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @10:06PM (#12349175)
Maybe that's not really OK anymore. I tend to be of the belief that, for freedom to prevail in the information age, information freedom must be absolute.
[ Parent | on HN ]