[ExI] privacy again

spike spike66 at att.net
Wed Mar 2 17:34:35 UTC 2016



There is a big case in the US courts about a newscaster who had a nude video
taken of her by a stalker who removed the peephole in the door.  The video
made it to the internet.  She claims damages against the hotel chain, not
against the guy who took the video.


This whole thing brings up a number of questions.  


Why does she think her exposed nudity is really worth 75 million bucks?


What if she had been an ordinary person like you and me: is our nudity worth
75 million, or does it need to be scaled somehow?



                Is there some kind of universal hotness scale?

                Do hotties get more if they are recorded nude than coldies
or tepidies?

                How much more?

                Can a person be so bone-deep ugly that such a video is worth
zero point nada?

                Is the payout proportional to the number of internet hits?



As we brought up a decade ago: it would be eeeeeasy easy to hide a video
device in a hotel room, almost completely without risk.  It could be set up
to receive a call and turn on at any time, and Skype the video to any remote
receiver, with very little risk of getting caught and not much cost really.
So are we now saying the hotel chain is responsible for find that?  In the
meantime, are we cool with it that all assured privacy in any public place,
any public restroom and any hotel room is 

now gone?  Could we not argue that there is no reasonable expectation of
privacy there?



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160302/7a1029eb/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list