On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 01:06:56AM +0000, Stephen Loosley wrote: > Ahh, and I’d guess the rest of us, out of range, are maybe quite jealous.
I'm not jealous. I'm concerned that giant corporations are getting special privileges to trespass over private property with low-flying drones, and to use cameras in those drones to spy on what's happening in private backyards for "diagnostic purposes" which will eventually become valuable data for sale to spammers (both legal and criminal), insurance & other private investigators, stalkers, police, government agencies and governments at local, state, and federal level, developers, nosy corporations in general - and anyone else willing to pay for it. Also for low-paid drone operators to perve on "under-dressed" people in their own private backyards where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, similar to but worse than how shopping mall etc guards currently perve on and trade recordings of "hot" women, including underage girls. The "benefits" will go to the corporations and to their customers who are too fucking lazy to go to the local milk bar. The price will be paid by the loss of privacy for everyone else. i.e. the traditional "privatise the profits, socialise the expenses" method. Google Street View was bad enough, recording what could be seen from the public street. This will be worse. > Wonder if such an asset to household management effects house prices? Being in a drone no-privacy zone will probably lower house prices. craig _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
