I'm not particularly fond of the whole "privilege" discourse, but this comment is a great example of somebody completely failing to understand a privilege they have. Which they share with many other people, sure,[0] but there are many people who, through no fault of their own, do need to worry about others learning about their location.
[0] Which is probably one reason why the discourse grates some. Privilege still sounds to me like it's something exclusive, like a 0.1%er thing. Naming stuff is hard.
It’s a fair point, and we should be sensitive to ill effects on the less privileged, but at some point it’s unreasonable to decry tech than is neutral or beneficial to the vast majority of people because it could possibly harm a small number of people.
The majority of people clutching pearls over the “privacy” implications of photo geolocation are at least as privileged as me, and have even less concept of what e.g. stalking victims go through than I do.
It’s just “think of the children” all over again; “I am uncomfortable with random people knowing my general vicinity” sounds weird, and “I am deeply concerned for the vulnerable people this could harm” sounds noble.
The reality is that those with serious privacy concerns aren’t posting random photos to the internet. I mean, jesus, there’s EXIF data. Hand wringing over AI is entirely performative here.
It's possible to accidentally post something, or have it swiped by many of the untrusted and untrustworthy applications on a PC or mobile device.
It's even easier to unintentionally include identifying information when intentionally making a post, whether by failing to catch it when submitting, or by including additional images in your online posting.
There are also wholesale uploads people may make automatically, e.g., when backing up content or transferring data between systems. That may end up unsecured or in someone else's hands.
Even very obscure elements may identify a very specific location. There's a story of how a woman's location was identified by the interior of her hotel room, I believe by the doorknobs. An art piece placed in a remote Utah location was geolocated based on elements of the geology, sun angle, and the like, within a few hours. The art piece is discussed in this NPR piece: <https://www.npr.org/2020/11/28/939629355/unraveling-the-myst...> (2020).
I read the "accidentally" as applying to the "identifying" not the "post", although I agree the sentence structure would suggest "accidentally" as a modifier for "post" that makes a lot less sense.
I live in Belltown, Seattle. Oh no! The world knows my neighborhood!
I'm not particularly fond of the whole "privilege" discourse, but this comment is a great example of somebody completely failing to understand a privilege they have. Which they share with many other people, sure,[0] but there are many people who, through no fault of their own, do need to worry about others learning about their location.
[0] Which is probably one reason why the discourse grates some. Privilege still sounds to me like it's something exclusive, like a 0.1%er thing. Naming stuff is hard.
It’s a fair point, and we should be sensitive to ill effects on the less privileged, but at some point it’s unreasonable to decry tech than is neutral or beneficial to the vast majority of people because it could possibly harm a small number of people.
The majority of people clutching pearls over the “privacy” implications of photo geolocation are at least as privileged as me, and have even less concept of what e.g. stalking victims go through than I do.
It’s just “think of the children” all over again; “I am uncomfortable with random people knowing my general vicinity” sounds weird, and “I am deeply concerned for the vulnerable people this could harm” sounds noble.
The reality is that those with serious privacy concerns aren’t posting random photos to the internet. I mean, jesus, there’s EXIF data. Hand wringing over AI is entirely performative here.
How do you “accidentally post a photo”?
It's possible to accidentally post something, or have it swiped by many of the untrusted and untrustworthy applications on a PC or mobile device.
It's even easier to unintentionally include identifying information when intentionally making a post, whether by failing to catch it when submitting, or by including additional images in your online posting.
There are also wholesale uploads people may make automatically, e.g., when backing up content or transferring data between systems. That may end up unsecured or in someone else's hands.
Even very obscure elements may identify a very specific location. There's a story of how a woman's location was identified by the interior of her hotel room, I believe by the doorknobs. An art piece placed in a remote Utah location was geolocated based on elements of the geology, sun angle, and the like, within a few hours. The art piece is discussed in this NPR piece: <https://www.npr.org/2020/11/28/939629355/unraveling-the-myst...> (2020).
Geoguessing of its location: <https://web.archive.org/web/20201130222850/https://www.reddi...>
Wikipedia article: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_monolith>
These are questions which barely deserve answering, let alone asking, in this day and age.
I read the "accidentally" as applying to the "identifying" not the "post", although I agree the sentence structure would suggest "accidentally" as a modifier for "post" that makes a lot less sense.
A selfie with a snippet of building in the background might give away your location even if you think there's no way it could be locatable.
Did you somehow accidentally share a selfie?
1 reply →