Privacy is doomed

If you make a miniature flying camera that is too small to be detected, then suddenly privacy ends. No one will ever be able to do somethign without being filmed.
ever

how will this affect society?

Why do that when you can make a camera that everyone wants to own and social websites where everyone wants to post photos and videos of themselves doing everything?

Anti-bug spray will need to be developed.

If I can see her naked, I’m sure the world will only be a better place.

because thats only photographs people WANT taken, how about an hd picture of you taking a shit, or cheating on your wife, or making a 45 minute long racial slur, or masturbating to incest porn.

imagine if literally if it was within reach to spy on anyone every fucking where. things would get interesting soon

you can see her naked and her parents can see you masturbating to her pictures, and you can see her parents doing this and loading a gun to kill you.

no more privacy or secrets anywhere. what would this do? how would this look like?

>you can see her parents doing this and loading a gun to kill you.
There will be too many people jerking it to her. One among many.

>One among many.
with face recognition software it would be easy to get a list for a price.

imagine if youre her teacher and you go to a parents meeting and he has footage of you dressed as a roman emperor jerking it off to her while yelling "yeah bitch take the cesars seed"

I wouldn't do it if I was her teacher. I would do it if there was a big leak of her nudes on the internet. No question.

there you go, one change, you cant masturbate to pictures of people you know...

think about it, think about the amount of time you have masturabted to facebook pics of people you knew irl and how would it change your relationship if they knew

build my house as a fucking bubble in a vacuum chamber requiring a spacesuit to walk from the outside-chamber airlock to the inside-bubble airlock.

well imagine that, a world in which the only safe places to live would be high tech ultra secure places.
basically, only goverments and corporations would be safe but most common people would still be unable to masturbate to pictures of their cousins.

Also, lol at cia secret agents using their safe rooms to masturbate to pictures of their cousins

>when youre in public you dont have privacy
No shit.

Unless you're meaning these things getting into your home and filming you, in which case I fucking hope whoever uses them has the best lawyers in the world.

i do mean that.

what lawyers? imaigne if they were inexpensive and easy to use, some random hackers films you masturbating to a pic of your 15 yo niece.

sure , tell me he couldnt blackmail you.

or even worse, just like in the black mirror episode, what if someone just filmed you and released it to the public, anonimously, you would never find him.

The Internet isn't as anonymous as people like to believe.
If it became an actual problem it is most likely going to become a problem for high profile targets first, and then the fuckers who use it will get their asses handed to them and the chumps will be scared out of using it against Joe public.

>it will get their asses handed to them and the chumps will be scared out of using it against Joe public.
sure, thats if you use it against high profile targets

thats like saying nobody will ever get murdered because high profile targets have a lot of security, they dont give a shit about what happens to regular people and it would be the same with this

>flying camera that is too small to be detected
literally magic and impossible

>taking a shit, or cheating on your wife, or making a 45 minute long racial slur, or masturbating to incest porn.
>or
You can't do these simultaneously?
Step up your game, pervlet.

taking a 45 minute long shit on incest porn

Not being able to notice these camera devicea by eye does not mean we can't develop devices that are able to sense these (through signal communication between camera and distant receiver maybe)

still it would be weird, and it would at least affect people in extreme poverty

This is already happening.
Snowden leaks put it all on the table. They can use any of your devices to do just this..
I guess it is a problem but I for one accept our exhibition.

My guess is a mass revolution within 100 years to destroy technocracy

a camera undetectable by naked eye is physically impossible
anything bigger than that can be easily detected by pocket radars, which could then send a powerful EM discharge shorting the camera

>a camera undetectable by naked eye is physically impossible
how about something as big as a flea?

>muh privacy

what you got to hide?

we will all have to start scooting about in invisibility capes only making brief appearances to take selfies to continue our social media empires

well the largest issue I can think of is where would they get power from

they can just dangle from the NSA mothership. no power required

There are literally millions of photos and vids of women that look pretty much like her, all over the Internet.

>well imagine that, a world in which the only safe places to live would be high tech ultra secure places.

I think that's not a valid conclusion.

OP's post does not state, but it and subsequent discussion pretty much assume that such mini flying cameras would be cheap enough that anybody could own a swarm of them.

In that case, do you not think there would be a market for cheap countermeasures?

Curious. Other than "we an;t do it yet," what leads you to this conclusion. ht known laws are violated by such a device? (Or more likely a swarm of them, to network processing and imaging.)

I'm not sure that the entertainment value of watching the lives of poor people is going to be as high as you seem to assume.

poor people are always the most vulnerable. Pay an information tax or the police gets a video of all the illegal things you did and your family gets one of all the embarasing things you did. Also poor people tend to do more illegal and embarasing things than others.

Also, it would be easier to manipulate them to scam them out of their money, even if its just a little bit per person, there are a lot of poor people, there are a lot of schemes that work like this, like the crack business. Crack is not very profitable but they sell A LOT of that shit, if every poor person in the us gives you a dollar per week thats like 1200 million dollars per month

>poor people are always the most vulnerable.

Depends on "to what?"

Poor people are not particularly vulnerable to kidnapping for ransom, having no money.

The poor would be less able to defend themselves from OPs micro-cameras, true enough. My point was that there would also be much less incentive to spy on them. For money, spy on the rich. For porn, spy on the rich and famous (who can afford to be beautiful and do their fucking on better sets.)

There's a reason all of those shitty (but popular) "Housewife" shows aren't about actual housewives, but are about affluent people. They are more interesting, they do more interesting things. "The Real Housewives of Blackwater, AZ" is not a thing,and never will be.

(Blackwater, AZ, is listed by the US Census as the lowest-income community in the US.)