I did a lot of partying around NYC (pre baby) where this rule is rare. There are usually close to 50% of the crowd taking selfies, putting the phone in the air to "record" the DJ, or generally scrolling through instagram instead of dancing. I thought this was the norm, but then I spent a summer in Berlin. There, people actually dance, and are there to appreciate the music. The vibe is so much more fun because everyone there is contributing to the energy by actually having a good time, instead of being preoccupied with showing people who are not with them that they are having a good time. I think nightlife in Berlin is so much better than NYC because of a combination of the cell phone rule along with the stricter door policies, and I hope those come to NYC by the time my kid gets old enough for me to be able to go out again.
Berlin does this for a completely different reason. Most of the clubs are FKK/kink/drugs zones. Having sticker on the camera stops people from taking photos of others doing the deed, making club goers more comfortable.
In berlin clubs where those things are not allowed, they generally don’t ask you to put sticker on cameras, unless they want to look cool like those places.
Its not so clear cut why its done. For sure its for privacy which has higher requirements in some spaces but nowdays majority of clubs have no photos rules. Thats trend around europe not only Berlin. Even when there are no stickers there will be no photo signs and bouncer will remind everyone about this.
> everyone there is contributing to the energy by actually having a good time, instead of being preoccupied with showing people who are not with them that they are having a good time
this screams "economists, behavioral economists, game theorists, sociologists and anthropologists" would love to study this"
people from all the above disciplines, where are you? this is your phd thesis
The glue from the stickers needed a solvent to remove from the lens after going out in Berlin and Amsterdam. Ruined my photos until I got it clean.
Generally I like the idea of people not being photo focused and if this is the fix, I’m fine with it.
But, to put Berlin on a pedestal of partying, especially compared to NYC, just screams “I have a very specific and narrow bias of what a good party is”. Let’s stop promoting a city that has formalized racist / nationalist bouncers into a “cool” thing.
These days, most clubs which are at the forefront of what's cool and interesting are doing this. If I go to a new place and I see stickers, I'm already pretty happy, because it's probably gonna be a nice time. They've taken the time and effort to think about the experience and all the little details that matter. Generic club hit places don't bother with stuff like this and it's a good proxy to separate the two.
I dropped into Fabric on a stopover in London in July (first time back on that floor in probably 15 years). I was surprised when they asked for my phone, but yeah it 100% made a difference. Would have spotted maybe 2-3 tourists taking photos at some point, but that was it. Great vibe. Mix of young and old.
Compare that to a recent bookashade gig in Sydney, which was smaller but was basically a film club event. 100 squares of light on record at any point (all with the same camera UI!) .. older crowd who probably should have known better, at least according to the article.
I've been to Fabric many times and have seen the opposite - people rip off the stickers as soon as they get indoors and then spend the whole night posting on Instagram and Snapchat. Stickers suck (not to mention the litter). The only way to have people not taking photos is to strictly enforce it and only let in the right crowd. There's places that pull this off, but they aren't as popular because TikTok ravers don't go there.
one of the most baudrillard moments of my life was seeing quite literally over 3/4 the audience at a sydney dance event filming , leaving only myself and a handful of others to dance at the back
"Divides" is a stretch here.
The BBC must report both points of view, so by default, anything they right must 'divide people'.
The 'division' in this article comes from:
>Some posted on Instagram concerns that clubs could suffer as social media videos of their night act as free adverts
Doesn't really paint the picture of this nightclub having its fanbase split in half arguing about whether it's good or bad....
I hate that this is the case. It’s been incredibly frustrating over the years seeing perfectly normal and universally accepted things be reported about, but they have to find the absolute dregs of society with whacky and extremely stupid ideas simply so they can say they “are impartial”.
It’s been everything from Brexit to Covid and everything in between.
I'll post this at the top level since there's 5+ comments about it:
The glue on these stickers is like a strong post-it note. The sticker stays on the lens fairly reliably, but leaves no residue at all when you take it off.
I attend a few parties that preach/practice this. Along with it being everyones responsibility to enforce a no cellphones policy on the dance floor. It provides for a much better experience on the dance floor. Just be yourself ;) Live in the NOW. I think some guy named Danny Tenaglia mentioned that once. The curators of these events have also built wall of sounds around the world(life changing BTW) and care about the music.
Education about a proper CLUB/PARTY night goes a long ways.
Some clubs in Berlin (Germany) already do this for quite some time and the people there are all fine with it.
The vibe is just different, because the people focus more on each other or themself instead of generating content for some online profiles.
The cultural and legal expectations around photographing people are very different in Germany than in most English-speaking countries, and especially the USA. In Germany, taking photos of people without permission is socially unacceptable, and sharing such photos is usually illegal.
In the USA, photographing people from somewhere the photographer has the right to be is protected as freedom of speech with few exceptions, and is less likely to be seen as rude. Of course a business can still impose its own rules of conduct inside.
Various clubs and parties in the NYC scene, too, going back well over a decade. I'm genuinely surprised to read there is some (perhaps exaggerated) controversy over this in the news. The places that have strict no photo / no video policies like this pretty explicitly _don't want_ a patron who became interested in attending primarily because they saw a video of the dance floor on Instagram, they cater to scenes and communities where word of mouth and reputation are more than enough to fill the room.
I don't recall getting stickers at any clubs NYC, although it's been a few years since I lived there. It was always on the honor system at places like Output and events like Black Market.
I have a personal rule of not taking videos or photos at any concerts or similar events for 4-5 years now.
I remember all the events more vividly, have a couple of interesting mental notes from all of them, and all of them are great material for conversations.
Also, it has the benefit of not watching the whole thing from a small screen which is fed from a tiny sensor, trying to keep image stabilized and convert the whole event to a challenge to capture low quality video (or set of photos) which I don't revisit.
That's because you don't give your brain a excuse to be lazy. If the brain knows that it can offload the information somewhere else, it will do so. Instead of you recalling from memory the image, you recall from memory where the image is https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22113...
This is certainly one of the reasons which I figured out (esp. during my personal productivity experiments), but on the other hand, not concentrating on "recording device" allows concentrating to the event more, leading to listening and seeing more what's happening on the stage.
I like to have a photo, so my personal rule is sometime early on, if the light is good, snap four or five PHOTOS in quick succession, then phone goes away.
Then I've got a good photo or two, but I'm actually watching the show.
I generally take a photo of the event's poster, after the event. That photo reminds me to look if there are any official (video) recordings of the event that I just attended. A good (audio) recording is equally nice, if it was a concert.
I understand that there’s issues of piracy (from the producer’s perspective), but I really wish every concert just had a concert DVD or something I could buy. That solves the FOMO of recording some unique performance.
While I don't have the FOMO, I concur. The last two concerts I went to were very unique. One had a great conductor, and the other one was a unique take on MJ's music overall.
I'll be very happy if there were high quality recordings to purchase, because I'd love to listen them over and over.
I take some photos if it's truly something memorable and doing so won't disturb people around me.
I never record video, though. Files several GBs big are simply too cumbersome to manage (and fill up my phone), and there's something profoundly stupid about watching something through a lense and screen when I'm physically right there in the moment.
I have occasionally recorded something by holding the phone under my chin, or just in front of my chin.
I've only done this three times this year, it has to be something unusual. Videos of bands are generally poor (especially the audio) so there's better material on YouTube.
It kinda of reads like you don't understand what a photo like that is, it's a memento, not an imax experience, it's kind of insulting you would think people think that
Sorry that my comment read that way. That was not my intention at all.
On the other hand, I understand what a photo like that means for the person who’s taking the photo. I’m both an amateur photographer and used to play in a symphony orchestra.
In my case, I both don’t want to potentially distract a performer, and don’t want to break my immersion and give my brain an excuse to be lazy. At the end, I leave every event happier and more satisfied.
Everybody is different and this is my perspective.
I'd mostly be worried that the sticky part is going to get on my lens. Do they use stickers with a non-sticky part in the middle? Do people make those?
From what I've seen they are just regular circle shaped stickers. If you're using a case usually you wouldnt get sticker glue on your lens but if you do you can rub it off with the inside of your tshirt sleeve.
The ones I've had stuck on my phone have been special stickers for the purpose. The glue is like a stronger post-it note. There's been no residue at all.
Would love to know myself as well, but I haven't seen any. I'd imagine there's at least some demand in the Bay Area for events like this? We get a good amount of electronic/dance shows already, and the underground scene still exists at least a bit. I've pondered throwing some events or even opening a venue like this, but don't currently have the right connections/resources.
Even back in the days of film I hated cameras. I was busy having fun like any 6 year old should and suddenly I'm called to stand still and smile for a camera. Or I'm busy looking at some scenery and people are trying to get a picture - you can find professional photographers who took a better picture if you need one for the wall, but most of the time nobody will look at that again (or best case they look at it one time to "review memories" - except they didn't have a memory to review has they never took the time to see the big picture only what is in the viewfinder)
I try to spend my time making memories, not taking photographs of others making memories.
I always thought the stickers over the camera thing was to protect the club's online presence. So that when a fight broke out, a belligerent patron was being ejected or when drugs were being consumed in the booths/bathrooms the establishment did not have to worry about footage landing on third party social, mapping or review platforms thereby sullying their name or brand.
Patron's privacy and safety is just a cover story.
Pretty split on this, I have tended to take a short clip of the DJ and the music if I'm liking it, and I try to make it so I'm not taking a vid of anyone in the crowd and they are kept anon. But I can see I'm at the thin end of the wedge.
OTH, one of the worse nights I went to to was in Geneva to see Lil Louis, and everyone on the dancefloor was just there taking selfies, it was utterly obnoxious.
I see a lot of comments about being present and in the now, but how much does privacy play a role? Some activities like soft but technically illegal drugs or certain fun behaviors may be more self suppressed if cameras are around. Any photo taken at a club could end up being viewed by an interviewer in a few years, etc.
Unsure about this specific case, but I personally try to avoid posting many selfies or any identifiable content online.
Always grew up being told colleges and employers look you up, and that all it takes is one poor perception to kill an opportunity.
I know this isn't as true as it might have been conveyed, but I still worry about image and how so many employers seem to care what happens in peoples personal lives, when to me as long as I show up and am meeting the objectives and expectations then that's all they need to worry about. My employer isn't compensating me to live a specific lifestyle and invade my privacy, as long as I'm a good employee then it should not matter.
I limit my presence online that is "official" ie selfies,blog posts or anything of the nature. I see this as a CYA because I want to be fired for how I perform at work and that alone, and because its helping keep my privacy above the average Joe.
I frequent a night-club that doesn't allow photography, but doesn't put stickers. People (esp. non-regulars) will occasionally take a photo because they forgot and it's such a normal thing they do in their lives. Removing a sticker requires significant more intentionality.
Never been to any kind of party, but the last thing I want is people taking my photo and tagging me all online. I get the idea or want to grab a selfie with friends, but if I'm doing something like that I'd rather not put strangers in the photo.
I try to respect peoples privacy when, on the very rare ocassion I decide to take a photo in public, and try to avoid people in a shot.
If their was one thing great about covid, it normalized the rare few people who wear a mask in public for privacy.
Wish their was a more effective way to stop all those creepy cameras from recording your face, as they are used to track you and your location and activity and makes it harder to stay offline.
The traffic cameras got your plates, the CCTV is in many stores and outside, and unless you walk around covered in IR lights to blind cameras and wear a mask, you basically leave a digital footprint even if you leave all devices at home.
Anecdotal story from the US: a boomer I know went to a play at a theatre, and since they don't allow photography, they put these stickers... on the phone case, not the camera. So now he has two stickers on the back of the phone case that don't come off easily.
I think the idea is that then other people can easily see the absence of a sticker, and then confidently intervene, a "safe" social objection, enforcing an unambiguous rule.
There's no weird guessing whether someone is really recording at the moment, no lengthy observation or excuses or negotiated results, it's a clear requirement with an immediate action.
P.S.: Come to think of it, masking requirements are similar: It doesn't matter if you "feel fine" or "it's just the sniffles" or "hayfever", you visibly wear a respiratory mask in this place, period. Too many people have abused that trust before and it's difficult/impossible to determine personalized exceptions.
Are there still places that require masks?? I don't know of any here.
I do actually have hayfever and wearing a mask all summer is not an option for other b medical reasons so I would avoid those but I have seen any in Europe.
> People violating the rule will be "politely asked to stop", says Abbott. "If you are seen doing it again, you will be asked to leave the venue."
I'm past my clubbing days but can attest to seeing this in practice at a couple venues. Someone started filming one of their friends and both got promptly escorted to the door.
It's possible yes. You can also take the phone out of the case. I do this sometimes when i need to scan a QR or something.
It doesn't stop people from doing it deliberately but it prevents the discussion between people holding up a phone and someone else thinking they're being filmed. If someone does that without the sticker it is immediately cause for calling security.
It sounds like many of the posters go to clubs that cater to various subcultures. If there's one thing that a sizable segment of programmers love, it's subcultures. Beyond that, even though programmers are overrepresented here compared to the general population, a lot of posters are not software developers by career but are somewhere in the orbit of the tech world.
I don't like the idea of having to clean the glue off my phone because the club is more concerned about people making fools out of themselves in public more than being concerned about my private property, it is sending the wrong message.
Maybe I'm old fashioned but a nightclub with hopefully security cameras would be the last place I would go for privacy and "free expression".
When I go to theaters they usually just tell me to turn off my phone or don't take pictures. It has the same weight because people who wouldn't listen would just take the sticker off easily.
If you would have paid attention to my comment you would know that my issue is not social signalling, my issue is getting glue on my phone for a childish reason.
I did a lot of partying around NYC (pre baby) where this rule is rare. There are usually close to 50% of the crowd taking selfies, putting the phone in the air to "record" the DJ, or generally scrolling through instagram instead of dancing. I thought this was the norm, but then I spent a summer in Berlin. There, people actually dance, and are there to appreciate the music. The vibe is so much more fun because everyone there is contributing to the energy by actually having a good time, instead of being preoccupied with showing people who are not with them that they are having a good time. I think nightlife in Berlin is so much better than NYC because of a combination of the cell phone rule along with the stricter door policies, and I hope those come to NYC by the time my kid gets old enough for me to be able to go out again.
Berlin does this for a completely different reason. Most of the clubs are FKK/kink/drugs zones. Having sticker on the camera stops people from taking photos of others doing the deed, making club goers more comfortable.
In berlin clubs where those things are not allowed, they generally don’t ask you to put sticker on cameras, unless they want to look cool like those places.
Its not so clear cut why its done. For sure its for privacy which has higher requirements in some spaces but nowdays majority of clubs have no photos rules. Thats trend around europe not only Berlin. Even when there are no stickers there will be no photo signs and bouncer will remind everyone about this.
Imho it helps multiple issues.
> everyone there is contributing to the energy by actually having a good time, instead of being preoccupied with showing people who are not with them that they are having a good time
this screams "economists, behavioral economists, game theorists, sociologists and anthropologists" would love to study this"
people from all the above disciplines, where are you? this is your phd thesis
The bouncers won’t let them in because they would harsh the vibe :)
4 replies →
The glue from the stickers needed a solvent to remove from the lens after going out in Berlin and Amsterdam. Ruined my photos until I got it clean.
Generally I like the idea of people not being photo focused and if this is the fix, I’m fine with it.
But, to put Berlin on a pedestal of partying, especially compared to NYC, just screams “I have a very specific and narrow bias of what a good party is”. Let’s stop promoting a city that has formalized racist / nationalist bouncers into a “cool” thing.
Don't take your phoen, problem solved
These days, most clubs which are at the forefront of what's cool and interesting are doing this. If I go to a new place and I see stickers, I'm already pretty happy, because it's probably gonna be a nice time. They've taken the time and effort to think about the experience and all the little details that matter. Generic club hit places don't bother with stuff like this and it's a good proxy to separate the two.
I dropped into Fabric on a stopover in London in July (first time back on that floor in probably 15 years). I was surprised when they asked for my phone, but yeah it 100% made a difference. Would have spotted maybe 2-3 tourists taking photos at some point, but that was it. Great vibe. Mix of young and old.
Compare that to a recent bookashade gig in Sydney, which was smaller but was basically a film club event. 100 squares of light on record at any point (all with the same camera UI!) .. older crowd who probably should have known better, at least according to the article.
I've been to Fabric many times and have seen the opposite - people rip off the stickers as soon as they get indoors and then spend the whole night posting on Instagram and Snapchat. Stickers suck (not to mention the litter). The only way to have people not taking photos is to strictly enforce it and only let in the right crowd. There's places that pull this off, but they aren't as popular because TikTok ravers don't go there.
one of the most baudrillard moments of my life was seeing quite literally over 3/4 the audience at a sydney dance event filming , leaving only myself and a handful of others to dance at the back
If this was a Fred Again.. show, every gig of his I’ve been to (bar Coachella) would’ve been a sociologist’s wet dream. Embarrassing for all involved.
"Divides" is a stretch here. The BBC must report both points of view, so by default, anything they right must 'divide people'.
The 'division' in this article comes from: >Some posted on Instagram concerns that clubs could suffer as social media videos of their night act as free adverts
Doesn't really paint the picture of this nightclub having its fanbase split in half arguing about whether it's good or bad....
I hate that this is the case. It’s been incredibly frustrating over the years seeing perfectly normal and universally accepted things be reported about, but they have to find the absolute dregs of society with whacky and extremely stupid ideas simply so they can say they “are impartial”.
It’s been everything from Brexit to Covid and everything in between.
That reminds me of a great Dara Ó Briain routine[0] about pseudoscience.
[0] https://youtu.be/YKZN-hBTBUE
Is it because they have to, or they choose to? There are a great many right wing outlets that call themselves impartial.
5 replies →
[flagged]
2 replies →
Most headlines nowadays turn me off. Why not say it's a good thing and as always there are few that don't like it?
I'll post this at the top level since there's 5+ comments about it:
The glue on these stickers is like a strong post-it note. The sticker stays on the lens fairly reliably, but leaves no residue at all when you take it off.
It depends. Some places use pretty strong stickers. I've taken to using a case with the sticker already pre-applied :)
I attend a few parties that preach/practice this. Along with it being everyones responsibility to enforce a no cellphones policy on the dance floor. It provides for a much better experience on the dance floor. Just be yourself ;) Live in the NOW. I think some guy named Danny Tenaglia mentioned that once. The curators of these events have also built wall of sounds around the world(life changing BTW) and care about the music.
Education about a proper CLUB/PARTY night goes a long ways.
Some clubs in Berlin (Germany) already do this for quite some time and the people there are all fine with it. The vibe is just different, because the people focus more on each other or themself instead of generating content for some online profiles.
The cultural and legal expectations around photographing people are very different in Germany than in most English-speaking countries, and especially the USA. In Germany, taking photos of people without permission is socially unacceptable, and sharing such photos is usually illegal.
In the USA, photographing people from somewhere the photographer has the right to be is protected as freedom of speech with few exceptions, and is less likely to be seen as rude. Of course a business can still impose its own rules of conduct inside.
Various clubs and parties in the NYC scene, too, going back well over a decade. I'm genuinely surprised to read there is some (perhaps exaggerated) controversy over this in the news. The places that have strict no photo / no video policies like this pretty explicitly _don't want_ a patron who became interested in attending primarily because they saw a video of the dance floor on Instagram, they cater to scenes and communities where word of mouth and reputation are more than enough to fill the room.
I don't recall getting stickers at any clubs NYC, although it's been a few years since I lived there. It was always on the honor system at places like Output and events like Black Market.
2 replies →
Also, Berlin has many clubs where clubbing culture and kinky/fetish/sexpositive cultures come together. Like KitKat or Berghain.
In those clubs it's more necessary to prevent photos obviously, and that habit makes it more acceptable in regular clubs.
OT but this reminded me of what a terrible thing it is to go to concerts now.
I don't see anything but phones in the air. I have attended some parties and concerts with stickers and they have insanely better vibes.
The first time entrance security put a sticker over my smartphone camera? That would be entering Samsung Digital City in Suwon, Korea.
The second time was going to a club in Amsterdam (Shelter) in 2019.
I have a personal rule of not taking videos or photos at any concerts or similar events for 4-5 years now.
I remember all the events more vividly, have a couple of interesting mental notes from all of them, and all of them are great material for conversations.
Also, it has the benefit of not watching the whole thing from a small screen which is fed from a tiny sensor, trying to keep image stabilized and convert the whole event to a challenge to capture low quality video (or set of photos) which I don't revisit.
That's because you don't give your brain a excuse to be lazy. If the brain knows that it can offload the information somewhere else, it will do so. Instead of you recalling from memory the image, you recall from memory where the image is https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22113...
This is certainly one of the reasons which I figured out (esp. during my personal productivity experiments), but on the other hand, not concentrating on "recording device" allows concentrating to the event more, leading to listening and seeing more what's happening on the stage.
Thanks for the paper, BTW.
I like to have a photo, so my personal rule is sometime early on, if the light is good, snap four or five PHOTOS in quick succession, then phone goes away.
Then I've got a good photo or two, but I'm actually watching the show.
I generally take a photo of the event's poster, after the event. That photo reminds me to look if there are any official (video) recordings of the event that I just attended. A good (audio) recording is equally nice, if it was a concert.
I understand that there’s issues of piracy (from the producer’s perspective), but I really wish every concert just had a concert DVD or something I could buy. That solves the FOMO of recording some unique performance.
While I don't have the FOMO, I concur. The last two concerts I went to were very unique. One had a great conductor, and the other one was a unique take on MJ's music overall.
I'll be very happy if there were high quality recordings to purchase, because I'd love to listen them over and over.
I take some photos if it's truly something memorable and doing so won't disturb people around me.
I never record video, though. Files several GBs big are simply too cumbersome to manage (and fill up my phone), and there's something profoundly stupid about watching something through a lense and screen when I'm physically right there in the moment.
I have occasionally recorded something by holding the phone under my chin, or just in front of my chin.
I've only done this three times this year, it has to be something unusual. Videos of bands are generally poor (especially the audio) so there's better material on YouTube.
It kinda of reads like you don't understand what a photo like that is, it's a memento, not an imax experience, it's kind of insulting you would think people think that
Sorry that my comment read that way. That was not my intention at all.
On the other hand, I understand what a photo like that means for the person who’s taking the photo. I’m both an amateur photographer and used to play in a symphony orchestra.
In my case, I both don’t want to potentially distract a performer, and don’t want to break my immersion and give my brain an excuse to be lazy. At the end, I leave every event happier and more satisfied.
Everybody is different and this is my perspective.
This is a very common practice in kink and fetish clubs as well as anywhere where well-known people go.
I'd mostly be worried that the sticky part is going to get on my lens. Do they use stickers with a non-sticky part in the middle? Do people make those?
From what I've seen they are just regular circle shaped stickers. If you're using a case usually you wouldnt get sticker glue on your lens but if you do you can rub it off with the inside of your tshirt sleeve.
The ones I've had stuck on my phone have been special stickers for the purpose. The glue is like a stronger post-it note. There's been no residue at all.
> I'd mostly be worried that the sticky part is going to get on my lens.
Then leave your mobile phone at home.
I'd bet a lot of people can't ever physically get to the place without a mobile phone.
Many wouldn't be able to pay for anything.
The ones I’ve seen use low-tack adhesives (acrylic-based, doesn’t leave residue)
Are there any places in SF with this rule?
Would love to know myself as well, but I haven't seen any. I'd imagine there's at least some demand in the Bay Area for events like this? We get a good amount of electronic/dance shows already, and the underground scene still exists at least a bit. I've pondered throwing some events or even opening a venue like this, but don't currently have the right connections/resources.
I'd like to see something like this in schools too - but instead the sticker goes over the screen!
Even back in the days of film I hated cameras. I was busy having fun like any 6 year old should and suddenly I'm called to stand still and smile for a camera. Or I'm busy looking at some scenery and people are trying to get a picture - you can find professional photographers who took a better picture if you need one for the wall, but most of the time nobody will look at that again (or best case they look at it one time to "review memories" - except they didn't have a memory to review has they never took the time to see the big picture only what is in the viewfinder)
I try to spend my time making memories, not taking photographs of others making memories.
I used to have the same opinion, my wife is the complete opposite.
Now I look back and wish I had more photos from the first 30 years of my life. Does posing for a few seconds really bother you that much?
Taking a photo doesn't mean you can't see the "bigger picture". Frankly, that's a very, very weak argument.
Additionally, I wish my parents had more photos of themselves so I could get to know them better, from days before I was even born.
Even then I want action shots not the lineup of people.
I always thought the stickers over the camera thing was to protect the club's online presence. So that when a fight broke out, a belligerent patron was being ejected or when drugs were being consumed in the booths/bathrooms the establishment did not have to worry about footage landing on third party social, mapping or review platforms thereby sullying their name or brand.
Patron's privacy and safety is just a cover story.
Pretty split on this, I have tended to take a short clip of the DJ and the music if I'm liking it, and I try to make it so I'm not taking a vid of anyone in the crowd and they are kept anon. But I can see I'm at the thin end of the wedge.
OTH, one of the worse nights I went to to was in Geneva to see Lil Louis, and everyone on the dancefloor was just there taking selfies, it was utterly obnoxious.
I see a lot of comments about being present and in the now, but how much does privacy play a role? Some activities like soft but technically illegal drugs or certain fun behaviors may be more self suppressed if cameras are around. Any photo taken at a club could end up being viewed by an interviewer in a few years, etc.
Unsure about this specific case, but I personally try to avoid posting many selfies or any identifiable content online.
Always grew up being told colleges and employers look you up, and that all it takes is one poor perception to kill an opportunity.
I know this isn't as true as it might have been conveyed, but I still worry about image and how so many employers seem to care what happens in peoples personal lives, when to me as long as I show up and am meeting the objectives and expectations then that's all they need to worry about. My employer isn't compensating me to live a specific lifestyle and invade my privacy, as long as I'm a good employee then it should not matter.
I limit my presence online that is "official" ie selfies,blog posts or anything of the nature. I see this as a CYA because I want to be fired for how I perform at work and that alone, and because its helping keep my privacy above the average Joe.
Also it makes me as a phishing target harder.
Even if it were true, no legally established organization would ever say "we have this policy so our patrons can do illegal drugs"
Wouldn't people just take the stickers off? Is this to just enforce intent around photos in the club??
I frequent a night-club that doesn't allow photography, but doesn't put stickers. People (esp. non-regulars) will occasionally take a photo because they forgot and it's such a normal thing they do in their lives. Removing a sticker requires significant more intentionality.
I'm guessing security would see you filming and come for a chat. Probably other patrons too, if that's the culture of the venue.
It was in the article. You get one warning and then you will be thrown out.
It’s more of a physical/psychological reminder, not an actually secure and invasive attempt to prevent access.
Taking it off gets you asked to leave when you’re seen holding up a phone.
Never been to any kind of party, but the last thing I want is people taking my photo and tagging me all online. I get the idea or want to grab a selfie with friends, but if I'm doing something like that I'd rather not put strangers in the photo.
I try to respect peoples privacy when, on the very rare ocassion I decide to take a photo in public, and try to avoid people in a shot.
If their was one thing great about covid, it normalized the rare few people who wear a mask in public for privacy.
Wish their was a more effective way to stop all those creepy cameras from recording your face, as they are used to track you and your location and activity and makes it harder to stay offline.
The traffic cameras got your plates, the CCTV is in many stores and outside, and unless you walk around covered in IR lights to blind cameras and wear a mask, you basically leave a digital footprint even if you leave all devices at home.
We live in a small world, and the chances of being exposed in the background of a selfie are larger than we might assume.
Anecdotal story from the US: a boomer I know went to a play at a theatre, and since they don't allow photography, they put these stickers... on the phone case, not the camera. So now he has two stickers on the back of the phone case that don't come off easily.
How does it work? Can people just not take the sticker off?
I think the idea is that then other people can easily see the absence of a sticker, and then confidently intervene, a "safe" social objection, enforcing an unambiguous rule.
There's no weird guessing whether someone is really recording at the moment, no lengthy observation or excuses or negotiated results, it's a clear requirement with an immediate action.
P.S.: Come to think of it, masking requirements are similar: It doesn't matter if you "feel fine" or "it's just the sniffles" or "hayfever", you visibly wear a respiratory mask in this place, period. Too many people have abused that trust before and it's difficult/impossible to determine personalized exceptions.
Are there still places that require masks?? I don't know of any here.
I do actually have hayfever and wearing a mask all summer is not an option for other b medical reasons so I would avoid those but I have seen any in Europe.
1 reply →
From the article.
> People violating the rule will be "politely asked to stop", says Abbott. "If you are seen doing it again, you will be asked to leave the venue."
I'm past my clubbing days but can attest to seeing this in practice at a couple venues. Someone started filming one of their friends and both got promptly escorted to the door.
Reminds me of
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L3eeC2lJZs
It's possible yes. You can also take the phone out of the case. I do this sometimes when i need to scan a QR or something.
It doesn't stop people from doing it deliberately but it prevents the discussion between people holding up a phone and someone else thinking they're being filmed. If someone does that without the sticker it is immediately cause for calling security.
Always shocked how many commenters here go to nightclubs, considering the programmer population
It sounds like many of the posters go to clubs that cater to various subcultures. If there's one thing that a sizable segment of programmers love, it's subcultures. Beyond that, even though programmers are overrepresented here compared to the general population, a lot of posters are not software developers by career but are somewhere in the orbit of the tech world.
Surely nobody has ever noted a relationship between autism and certain sensory experiences or movements.
also fun fact: jwz owns one
I don't like the idea of having to clean the glue off my phone because the club is more concerned about people making fools out of themselves in public more than being concerned about my private property, it is sending the wrong message.
It's sending the message that people's privacy and space for free expression is more important than your social signalling.
Maybe I'm old fashioned but a nightclub with hopefully security cameras would be the last place I would go for privacy and "free expression".
When I go to theaters they usually just tell me to turn off my phone or don't take pictures. It has the same weight because people who wouldn't listen would just take the sticker off easily.
If you would have paid attention to my comment you would know that my issue is not social signalling, my issue is getting glue on my phone for a childish reason.