Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Click Orlando)   Local 6 in Orlando finds a drone with a GoPro cam containing 2 hours of video - part of which shows woman sunbathing   (clickorlando.com) divider line 313
    More: Florida, GoPro, Altamonte Springs  
•       •       •

13465 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jun 2013 at 10:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



313 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-25 12:18:28 PM  

MNguy: Get the fark off of my lawn though.


I was never on your lawn. I did violate the fark out of your lawn's privacy by looking at it from the sidewalk though.
 
2013-06-25 12:19:09 PM  
Slow News Day Tuesday - well then lets make some schitt up!   It coulda been bad.  It coulda been horrific.  It coulda been the end of PRIVACY AS WE KNOW IT - yeah, that's better.
Wondering when I'll have to get a permit for that 1200mm lens I've been eyeballin'.  Because you know, I coulda been on a roof, overlookin' the freeway and the park and the beach and -

theoutlawlife.files.wordpress.com

and Fox News was there . . .
 
2013-06-25 12:19:36 PM  

smoothvirus: MNguy I think you're making the mistake of assuming that the only reason someone would put a camera on a quadcopter is to spy on people.

You're missing something important, people are boring. Something like a sunset from 300 feet up, or taking aerial video of a distant lightning storm is much more interesting.


I've got no problem with that.  But if my wife is sunbathing and some 16-year old says 'hey'  well, gtfo and leave my family alone.
 
2013-06-25 12:20:52 PM  

Noticeably F.A.T.: MNguy: Get the fark off of my lawn though.

I was never on your lawn. I did violate the fark out of your lawn's privacy by looking at it from the sidewalk though.


Sorry, legally speaking, my fence was under regulation and you were totes justified at looking into my bathroom window.
 
2013-06-25 12:21:49 PM  

MNguy: firefly212: MNguy: firefly212: MNguy: Mikey1969: MNguy: How is it different?  You're wrong and a little bit creepy.

I explained how it was different, I'm not "wrong and a little bit creepy". I'm right, and you're a 'lot bit' dense.

I'll explain it again:
Clothes are the privacy barrier. You violate that privacy barrier by hiding in a place where you can get around the barrier and take pictures. Same thing with people who sneak cameras into bathroons. They are getting around the privacy barrier. This woman is in public, she is wearing her choice of clothing in public(Her privacy barrier), and nobody is getting around that. If you are walking naked in your living room and can be seen from the street because your front blinds are open, you have no right to privacy there. Move from in front of the window, and you do. Once there is a barrier that people have to circumvent or violate(Such as a skirt in this case), you are protected.

You also aren't protected if you have a low fence in your yard and walk out back naked. People standing in the next yard don't have to avert their eyes. If you have a tall fence, on the other hand, and they climb a ladder, or drill a hole in it, then they are violating your right to privacy. The sad thing is; I'm pretty sure my 15 year old stepson can grasp this concept.

You're parsing words, and coming off like a farking creep who takes pictures of people who are unsuspecting.  It should involve an explicit agreement to allow photos, not some tenuous 'privacy barrier'.

I should be rich, but things aren't as they should be. As it stands, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy/non-recording/no photos when you are in publicly viewable areas. Whether we're talking about cities or companies using cctv systems, tourists taking pictures, or buzzwords like "drones" the reality is when you are in an area that can be viewed from a public place, you're putting yourself out there. If you don't want dirty nudie pics of you going around, be a n ...


I absolutely agree with laws banning upskirt photos and cp. It's disgusting... I just don't think we really need to have like... "photo police" trying to decide whether I was trying to take a picture of a moose or of the skateboarder with exceptionally bad timing. WRT the r/c toys, like I was saying, we see them all the time up here in the mountains, surveyors use them, firespotters use them, race teams use them to follow racers, and frequently homeowners this time of year will use them to survey where they need to cut standing dead trees. If people happen to wander into their frame of vision, I don't think it's particularly pressing that we need to go track those people down and get consent forms. Same for even google streetviews, if you happen to be on the sidewalk, no matter what you're wearing... you're in a public place, on a sidewalk, google shouldn't have to go to great lengths to get your consent (I do support them blurring faces though). Even insofar as building mounted cameras up high (probably higher than most drones can fly), I see no particular issue with them getting consent from persons within their field of view.
 
2013-06-25 12:23:26 PM  
Back in my day we would have to peak through a window or a hole in the fence. Damn spoiled kids these days
!
 
2013-06-25 12:24:37 PM  
firefly212:

I should be rich, but things aren't as they should be. As it stands, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy/non-recording/no photos when you are in publicly viewable areas. Whether we're talking about cities or companies using cctv systems, tourists taking pictures, or buzzwords like "drones" the reality is when you are in an area that can be viewed from a public place, you're putting yourself out there. If you don't want dirty nudie pics of you going around, ...

The thing is, we do need privacy police.  Too many people think that anywhere out in 'public' is all of the sudden fair game for exploitation.
 
2013-06-25 12:26:01 PM  
I'm not outside waving my dick around because there are decency laws against it.  But if I want to wave my dick around in my backyard whirlpool, I ought to be able to.
 
2013-06-25 12:27:25 PM  

MNguy: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.  If you want creepy photos of happy families or couples, more power to you.  Get the fark off of my lawn though.


Man, why is it that you're so terrified of a camera? They're not going to hurt you.
 
2013-06-25 12:30:11 PM  

servlet: MNguy: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.  If you want creepy photos of happy families or couples, more power to you.  Get the fark off of my lawn though.

Man, why is it that you're so terrified of a camera? They're not going to hurt you.


No, they are not.  But I don't want pictures of my niece on the internet.  Nor do I want upskirt pics of my girlfriend circulating because 'it was in public view'
 
2013-06-25 12:32:00 PM  
If I just chuck a handycam up in the air and get glimpses of the neighbor's yard, is that a drone?
 
2013-06-25 12:32:04 PM  
 

MNguy: Too many people think that anywhere out in 'public' is all of the sudden fair game for exploitation.


How do you have any expectation of privacy while in public?
 
2013-06-25 12:33:09 PM  
"My drone sleeps alone" - P. Benatar
 
2013-06-25 12:33:23 PM  

MNguy: But I don't want pictures of my niece on the internet


Better not let her leave the house.

MNguy: Nor do I want upskirt pics of my girlfriend circulating because 'it was in public view'


Unless she was lifting her skirt up, it wasn't in public view.
 
2013-06-25 12:33:47 PM  
When did everyone start referring to RC toys as "drones"?? I must have missed that memo.
 
2013-06-25 12:35:13 PM  

Noticeably F.A.T.: MNguy: Too many people think that anywhere out in 'public' is all of the sudden fair game for exploitation.

How do you have any expectation of privacy while in public?


Fine, let's just do it British style and take pictures every waking moment of every waking person's life.  I have an expectation that my life won't be violated.  It's less intrusive to leave me alone than it is to allow you access to my every waking moment.
 
2013-06-25 12:36:29 PM  
Noticeably F.A.T.:

Unless she was lifting her skirt up, it wasn't in public view.

That honestly made me sick to my stomach.  fark the fark off.
 
2013-06-25 12:36:51 PM  
We now interrupt this privacy flamewar to bring you pictures of women sunbathing

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

i216.photobucket.com

Thank you.
We now return to your regularly scheduled flamewar.
 
2013-06-25 12:39:38 PM  

MNguy: It's less intrusive to leave me alone than it is to allow you access to my every waking moment.


I don't have access to every moment in your life. I do however have access to what you display while we're both in a shared space.

Where do you think the boundary is between personal and public space? If we're both in a park, am I not allowed to look at you even when you're standing in front of me? Do I have the right to walk up to you completely nude and tell you to avert your eyes, you farking pervert?
 
2013-06-25 12:41:54 PM  

MNguy: No, they are not.  But I don't want pictures of my niece on the internet.  Nor do I want upskirt pics of my girlfriend circulating because 'it was in public view'


First of all, what's the difference if I see your niece out with you at the grocery store or if I see her in some street photography site on the internet? Second, if you don't want people taking pictures of something, then you need to keep it out of public view. The laws on the subject are very clear, so you can go educate yourself and restrict your movements to the locations where no one will have the right to photograph you.

I think upskirt photos have already been discussed, there are already laws against that, and no one's arguing about it except you (and I don't even know who you're arguing with).

Further reading, should you be interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/know-your-rights-photographers
 
2013-06-25 12:42:28 PM  

Banned on the Run: We now interrupt this privacy flamewar to bring you pictures of women sunbathing

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x666]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x333]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 750x500]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 800x531]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x749]

Thank you.
We now return to your regularly scheduled flamewar.


I'll be in my bunk.

/Totally not just a bookmark
 
2013-06-25 12:42:38 PM  
I have a feeling there will be a solution found really quickly when an important lawmaker's 18 year old daughter is filmed sunbathing topless/naked in their private back yard.
 
2013-06-25 12:45:19 PM  

MNguy: That honestly made me sick to my stomach. fark the fark off.


Then why the fark did you bring it up? Nobody said anything about looking up her skirt until you did, and then half the thread told you that it's not legal to do so, and explained why. There's only one person in this thread who seems to think that upskirt pics are legal, and that's you.

Wait, I understand now. You're a farking lunatic. It's the only explanation for how you came up with a strawman argument and then proceeded to lose to it.
 
2013-06-25 12:46:38 PM  

TheGreatGazoo: I have a feeling there will be a solution found really quickly when an important lawmaker's 18 year old daughter is filmed sunbathing topless/naked in their private back yard.


The solution already exists in the laws that are already on the books.
 
2013-06-25 12:46:55 PM  

TheGreatGazoo: I have a feeling there will be a solution found really quickly when an important lawmaker's 18 year old daughter is filmed sunbathing topless/naked in their private back yard.


The solution will be to ban all the legitimate uses of them, in the interest of privacy... so no more firespotting, surveying land, looking for standing dead (tree) patches that need to be cut on your own land, etc... because privacy.
 
2013-06-25 12:47:40 PM  

Waldo Pepper: but not when it comes to photos or video. Much like going to a football game as it is a private event. it is a thin line but still a line.

Completely public would be open to the public at large without restrictions.


Sorry, at a football game, if I take a picture of my buddy, and you're in the background, you can't sue me. Same thing if I skip my buddy and take a pic of you because you are a "superfan" with an elaborate Broncos Papier-mâché  horse's head strapped on. Same with the pool at an apartment complex. I can take a picture of friends with people in the background, or I can even take a pic of some girl sunbathing, but I risk her getting her boyfriend, husband, or father to beat the shiat out of me.
 
2013-06-25 12:47:51 PM  

Noticeably F.A.T.: MNguy: It's less intrusive to leave me alone than it is to allow you access to my every waking moment.

I don't have access to every moment in your life. I do however have access to what you display while we're both in a shared space.

Where do you think the boundary is between personal and public space? If we're both in a park, am I not allowed to look at you even when you're standing in front of me? Do I have the right to walk up to you completely nude and tell you to avert your eyes, you farking pervert?


Potentilly you do, and I'd prefer that you don't.  In my backyard?  Yes, avert your eyes and don't send a camera above me to take pictures.  When I'm wagging my cock in your face, maybe you could have a reaction, but still, keep in in house.
 
2013-06-25 12:48:16 PM  

Banned on the Run: We now interrupt this privacy flamewar to bring you pictures of women sunbathing

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x666]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x333]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 750x500]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 800x531]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x749]

Thank you.
We now return to your regularly scheduled flamewar.


No, don't return.  Stay on the interruption.
 
2013-06-25 12:49:09 PM  

Noticeably F.A.T.: MNguy: That honestly made me sick to my stomach. fark the fark off.

Then why the fark did you bring it up? Nobody said anything about looking up her skirt until you did, and then half the thread told you that it's not legal to do so, and explained why. There's only one person in this thread who seems to think that upskirt pics are legal, and that's you.

Wait, I understand now. You're a farking lunatic. It's the only explanation for how you came up with a strawman argument and then proceeded to lose to it.


Explain why public displays are illegal to film?  You seem to be in favor of really disgusting practices.
 
2013-06-25 12:49:38 PM  

Stoj: If I just chuck a handycam up in the air and get glimpses of the neighbor's yard, is that a drone?


Only if you catch it... otherwise it is just a dumb idea.
 
2013-06-25 12:50:26 PM  

firefly212: TheGreatGazoo: I have a feeling there will be a solution found really quickly when an important lawmaker's 18 year old daughter is filmed sunbathing topless/naked in their private back yard.

The solution will be to ban all the legitimate uses of them, in the interest of privacy... so no more firespotting, surveying land, looking for standing dead (tree) patches that need to be cut on your own land, etc... because privacy.


Look, I'm not against some public interest stuff, but taking pictures of a topless gal for shiats and giggles doesn't seem right.
 
2013-06-25 12:53:35 PM  
I'm sorry if you don't have any family or friends that you would be pissed about clandestine photos.  But some of us do have them and would care to not have that happening.  Even if they are in public.  You farking creeps.
 
2013-06-25 12:57:07 PM  

MNguy: smoothvirus: So let me get this straight, MNguy, anyone with a camera on an RC aircraft is a pedophile now?

Potentially, yes.  A voyeur at best.


"Potentially" nice weasel word, there.
 
2013-06-25 12:57:32 PM  
Is DRONECAMGIRLS.COM taken yet?
 
2013-06-25 12:59:13 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: MNguy: smoothvirus: So let me get this straight, MNguy, anyone with a camera on an RC aircraft is a pedophile now?

Potentially, yes.  A voyeur at best.

"Potentially" nice weasel word, there.


Did you see the second word?  I'm sorry if you identify with the voyeur and have no life of your own.  Please stop taking pictures of my niece.
 
2013-06-25 01:01:22 PM  

Banned on the Run: We now interrupt this privacy flamewar to bring you pictures of women sunbathing

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x666]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x333]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 750x500]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 800x531]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x667]

[i216.photobucket.com image 500x749]

Thank you.
We now return to your regularly scheduled flamewar.


#4, #6, and #8 need sammiches.  Stat, in the case of #4.
 
2013-06-25 01:03:26 PM  
Taking pictures of people in public is legal, in most instances. Deal with it.
 
2013-06-25 01:05:00 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: Taking pictures of people in public is legal, in most instances. Deal with it.


Fine.  It's legal.  Don't take pictures of my family though.
 
2013-06-25 01:11:57 PM  

mrgawler: Oh look, another FAIR and BALANCED article.


What does 'fair and balanced' have to do with the Orlando CBS affiliate?
 
2013-06-25 01:12:51 PM  

MNguy: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: MNguy: smoothvirus: So let me get this straight, MNguy, anyone with a camera on an RC aircraft is a pedophile now?

Potentially, yes.  A voyeur at best.

"Potentially" nice weasel word, there.

Did you see the second word?  I'm sorry if you identify with the voyeur and have no life of your own.  Please stop taking pictures of my niece.


Huh? I'm not taking pictures of anybody, weirdo. Just pointing out that "potentially" is a silly weasel word.
 
2013-06-25 01:13:43 PM  

MNguy: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: MNguy: smoothvirus: So let me get this straight, MNguy, anyone with a camera on an RC aircraft is a pedophile now?

Potentially, yes.  A voyeur at best.

"Potentially" nice weasel word, there.

Did you see the second word?  I'm sorry if you identify with the voyeur and have no life of your own.  Please stop taking pictures of my niece.


Also, you seem way too interested in your adolescent niece, dude. Just sayin...
 
2013-06-25 01:15:54 PM  

skinink: Why did the kid talk to the news? Now the cop have more than enough to investigate him if they want.



I don't even think that's illegal... it's just frowned upon like masturbating in an airplane bathroom.
 
2013-06-25 01:16:04 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: MNguy: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: MNguy: smoothvirus: So let me get this straight, MNguy, anyone with a camera on an RC aircraft is a pedophile now?

Potentially, yes.  A voyeur at best.

"Potentially" nice weasel word, there.

Did you see the second word?  I'm sorry if you identify with the voyeur and have no life of your own.  Please stop taking pictures of my niece.

Also, you seem way too interested in your adolescent niece, dude. Just sayin...


I don't think he has one... pictures or it didn't happen
 
2013-06-25 01:18:40 PM  

MNguy: Sin_City_Superhero: Taking pictures of people in public is legal, in most instances. Deal with it.

Fine.  It's legal.  Don't take pictures of my family though.


If they're in public, I can take pictures.  Deal with it.
 
2013-06-25 01:20:04 PM  
I'm under the impression that those consumer level 'drones' can't really produce enough lift to carry much, right?  I mean a GoPro cam is pretty light, but carrying anything over a few lbs would basically prevent it from flying, right?
 
2013-06-25 01:22:46 PM  

MNguy: Fine.  It's legal.  Don't take pictures of my family though.


And what if I do? The law will be on my side in any instance, save for where you have an expectation of privacy. Those situations are clearly defined by the law, which I know very well and abide by completely.
 
2013-06-25 01:23:49 PM  

ronaprhys: MNguy: Sin_City_Superhero: Taking pictures of people in public is legal, in most instances. Deal with it.

Fine.  It's legal.  Don't take pictures of my family though.

If they're in public, I can take pictures.  Deal with it.


Ha, sure.  Let me take pictures of your kid.  Also, your wife has a wide stance.
 
2013-06-25 01:24:09 PM  

PsyLord: I'm under the impression that those consumer level 'drones' can't really produce enough lift to carry much, right?  I mean a GoPro cam is pretty light, but carrying anything over a few lbs would basically prevent it from flying, right?


They're just RC toys, you could maybe load 1.5-2lbs on most of the "consumer level" ones at best, so... not much. They do make commercial ones that are bigger, hold more fuel (enough for a couple hours of airtime), and can support multiple cameras including some with gyro stabilization and mounts that can be aimed... they also make variants for ones that need to stay stable in gusty/variable winds. Those commercial ones are neat, but the race crew guy said his was about 40k, so more than your average joe was gonna spend.
 
2013-06-25 01:24:31 PM  

servlet: MNguy: Fine.  It's legal.  Don't take pictures of my family though.

And what if I do? The law will be on my side in any instance, save for where you have an expectation of privacy. Those situations are clearly defined by the law, which I know very well and abide by completely.


Thanks pedo, for informing me of the law.
 
2013-06-25 01:25:03 PM  

MNguy: ronaprhys: MNguy: Sin_City_Superhero: Taking pictures of people in public is legal, in most instances. Deal with it.

Fine.  It's legal.  Don't take pictures of my family though.

If they're in public, I can take pictures.  Deal with it.

Ha, sure.  Let me take pictures of your kid.  Also, your wife has a wide stance.


Man you are creepy. Yikes
 
Displayed 50 of 313 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report