Archive

Posts Tagged ‘privacy’

No Photos, Please

August 17, 2014 Leave a comment

The cameras are everywhere. From pockets to street corners, to concerts and games, the world is full of image and video capturing devices. One can venture into the eyes of these devices without willingly participating. Walk the dog on the trail, take a friend to a concert and one might just be photographed.

Given that one might not desire such “captures” to take place, modern technology should include an option to protect the identity of those involved. If one does not want to be captured, he or she should have the right to be blurred or distorted in some form that renders the captured image free of identifying marks.

As Native Americans were suspicious of the photograph, contemporary citizens might find similar concerns with technology of today. For whatever reason one feels uncomfortable it is to the benefit of all involved that technology work to embrace the rights of privacy and establish means to remove the unintended subjects of photography.

Advertisements

Impersonal The Person

March 24, 2014 Leave a comment

In her interview with Brian Lehrer, Danah Boyd discusses contemporary challenges in child maturation. Well-versed in technologies complicated relationship with parents and their children, her work bases its conclusions on anecdotal evidence with young people. Her arguments are cogent and well-researched, and present a slew of new ideas about technology. From Boyd it becomes clear that a new perspective about technology must be developed to educate both parents and children. How has the internet changed the way we mature? Clearly, the relationship between peers has been altered drastically by technology. In Boyd we hear the complicated levels of these changes: alterations both for peers in similar age groups and between peers of different groups.

Each generation relates to technology differently. The ways in which an older generation uses Facebook is drastically different from a younger generation. Despite a common platform the two groups both utilize and understand the technology differently. From this great void of understanding comes significant confusion. How do children relate to their parents posting on Facebook? What do children do when their parents refuse them Facebook access or insist they function as a gate-keeper?

As our relationship with technology develops so to will our relationship with those who use technology. Just as users of Facebook come to understand the platform, the means of understanding others who use the platform will develop. Will a sense of someone’s “Facebook-self” become more common? Are we capable of allowing someone to exist as someone else on the internet? The online world is rich with opportunities to be someone else. In these new identities an amazing wealth of power can be seized. Where confusion enters the picture is when these distinct personalities are blurred. With the use of alternative identities it becomes critical that distinctions remain intact. How do parents keep their children safe? Ultimately each family must reach their own conclusion; though, a recognition of the multiple identities of online life is essential. Disregarding this is to disregard the rules of the internet and the very reality in which we live.

 

The Ultimate Absurdity

March 17, 2013 Leave a comment

Pornography is the ultimate absurdest art. Private becomes public as content is created to simulate a creative act.

Absurdest art focuses on the actions of characters existing in a world without meaning. Characters within these narratives act without purpose because their actions have no purpose. Life is void of meaning and in such a world, actions take place without context. There is no meaning for doing something when no justification or need exists. In essence life is a game of chasing one’s tail until death. Why act when no result will follow? All of life is folly.

Pornography is the ultimate absurdest art. Actors within these films exhibit an intimate action for the purpose of explicit display. Actors here make explicit what is intimate and private becomes public. Pornography is understood as material containing actions determined to be private. Oddly the very components of pornography, the human organs and actions, are referred to as “privates”. In naming such items as “private” we indicate their relation to the world (they are not meant for show). Does a violation of these categorization give way to excitement? Is one aspect of pornography’s draw the fact that social rules are violated?

Nudity is the least common denominator of entertainment. If the basest goal of entertainment is to excite then the most basic spark is the naked human form. Ironically what excites us the most is that which is most common. We all possess a human body and can very easily view it in the naked form. While variations do exist, the common human form is the most common component of pornography. We are jolted by the very thing we possess and can most readily observe.

When a pornographic film is displayed in public a meta-swill of context is born: the private made public becomes public and private. If viewed in darkened rooms of theaters, a private moment made public enters a new realm of privacy. Here the individual views another’s private moment of privacy in public. Does this viewer claim his right to view the private made public in private? Dare we censor such displays? Maybe the cycle completes here: private made public returns to privacy. You can have your dirty movie but keep it in your own home. We often argue that “what goes on behind close doors is none of our business.” Pornography makes these private acts its business and draws much of its power from this violation. Private made public for your own private viewing.

Relative Experiences

July 26, 2011 Leave a comment

Though we often design experiences to be individual in nature, we can never avoid the outside influences that force us to recalibrate our perceptions. We crave the private moment, in many cases actually strive to find a place or a moment in which we can focus on a personal need. Do these places really exist? No human being can truly be alone.

Notions of a “private space” grow increasingly delusional as devices and expectations more tightly bind the world with every waking moment. A constant need to function in a state of awareness creates a situation in which the individual cannot break away. Once we give into the desire to be constantly aware there comes a refusal to break away and with it the inability to alter course and hide away in the private space.

Try as we might, ventures into potential private spaces create moments of disappointment. A walk in the woods designed to allow for reflection becomes a moment of public performance as we find others with similar desires. One may be quick to compare his or her experiences with these common peace seekers. Suddenly the afternoon walk is a sign of inherent laziness as others jog and bike by at an increased intensity.

All experiences are relative when a private space does not exist. When the private space has been eliminated the individual must function in a constant state of comparison. How do I relate to another performing a similar behavior at this similar time and location? When one considers his or her relation in comparison to the rest of the world a state of confusion may reign. The private space should be protected but for many the desire for constant awareness may lead to the elimination of this crucial human escape.

%d bloggers like this: