What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

Discomfort with Being Turned into “Content”

• Many commenters share the author’s unease: they want to enjoy hobbies, gyms, concerts, kids’ events, etc. without becoming material for YouTube, TikTok, or live streams.
• People describe feeling less free to be silly, learn, or make mistakes in communities (airsoft, music, sports, dancing) when everything might be broadcast and archived.

Law vs Etiquette

• A recurring split: “it’s legal in public, so tough” vs. “law isn’t a moral compass.”
• Several argue that filming in public is a vital right (journalism, police accountability, documentation), and banning it would be worse than the problem.
• Others say this misses the point: the issue is courtesy and “basic human decency,” not criminalization.

Public vs Digital Public (Scale & Permanence)

• Multiple threads stress that “visible in public” is not the same as “globally searchable, permanent, AI‑indexed record.”
• Concerns include stalking, employer/visa checks, culture clashes, future facial‑recognition dragnets, and being meme‑ified over minor embarrassments.
• Some dismiss these as hypothetical; others cite real experiences with harassment, revenge porn, or political targeting.

Private Venues & Hobbies

• Important distinction: airsoft fields, gyms, pools, kids’ classes, weddings are usually private property with rules.
• Many think such venues should explicitly decide: no cameras, camera‑only sessions, or clear opt‑in/opt‑out policies.
• Examples: gyms banning filming; kids’ activities requiring photo consent; nightclubs stickering phone cameras; “no-photo” wedding ceremonies.

Proposed Consent Mechanisms

• Ideas floated:
  • Visual signals like a “no‑publish” lanyard or badge (some say opt‑out; others want opt‑in only).
  • Venue‑level “recording” vs “non‑recording” times or events.
  • Mandatory blurring of non‑consenting faces (noted as easy with current tools).
  • Cultural norm: don’t publish strangers’ images without a compelling reason.

Defenses of Broad Filming Rights

• Arguments for permissiveness:
  • Strong free‑expression traditions; courts in some countries explicitly back “no expectation of privacy in public.”
  • Fear of overbroad laws chilling street photography, news, and documenting abuses.
  • Practicality: model releases for everyone in frame are unworkable and ripe for abuse.

Generational & Cultural Differences

• Several notice a divide:
  • Some older commenters and many parents strongly resist being recorded or having kids online.
  • Others—often younger or long used to cameras—see constant visibility as “just part of life,” or note that younger people now retreat into private groups and locked accounts.
• Cultural contrast: some European and Asian contexts reportedly treat public filming and publishing as much less acceptable than Anglophone norms.

Technology, Surveillance, and the Future

• Widespread worry about smart glasses, cheap ubiquitous cameras, and AI that can track faces across platforms.
• Some suggest legal limits (e.g., default auto‑deletion, restrictions on CCTV retention), others think governments and platforms aren’t nearly as capable or interested as critics fear.
• A few propose technical countermeasures (laser/LIDAR to blind cameras, clothing with patterns designed to trigger moderation or copyright filters).

Side Thread: Airsoft and the Environment

• Multiple comments question firing thousands of plastic pellets into woods.
• “Biodegradable” PLA BBs are criticized as largely non‑degrading in real conditions; commenters recall old pellets still visible years later.