• BassTurd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Having a hidden camera in a room would be illegal. The chance of a hidden camera existing is near 0%. Just to survive, people have to be able to trust in something rather than question every single aspect, and trusting that your medical office isn’t illegally wired to record you secretly is a safe bet. However, when a dumbass walks in with their personal gear that is designed to record and save that recording into a cloud is not even remotely acceptable, especially when that cloud is Meta.

    Comparing the two like the hidden camera is a common thing is some major tinfoil hat shit.

    • LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The chance of a hidden camera existing is near 0%

      You can’t genuinely believe this, can you? If a person is a creep who wants to record people in private situations without their consent, there’s a much higher than 0% chance.

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yes, I and damn near everyone else believes it. Do you sweep for cameras whenever you go to the doctor? What about public restrooms? If there is a creep doctor that is willing to risk everything for a peep, yes, it’s possible. How many out of the millions of doctors out there do you think have put a hidden camera in their office? If it’s less than 1 in 100, then that is near 0%.

    • joe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      The chance of a hidden camera existing is near 0%.

      How would you know this? The chance of them getting caught might be near 0%, but the fact that they’re hidden means that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You’d only have data for the ones that were found.

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Because hidden cameras aren’t common and given the legality of the situation, the risk to any medical professional to try and sneak in and use a hidden camera is extremely high. It’s not impossible, it’s just extremely unlikely. There are many many things in life that can be trusted because the odds are extremely favorable, and trusting that there aren’t hidden cameras in a doctor’s office is one of them.

        Again, to not trust this reality is conspiracy level insanity. If you wanted, you can go in and sweep a medical room for hidden cameras if you’re so insecure that that’s what’s needed for piece of mind, but everyone will think you’re loony tunes.

        • joe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          What do you think of when you see the phrase “hidden camera” and why doesn’t that include a concealed phone?

          • BassTurd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Did I ever say it doesn’t include concealed phones? Do you sweep for hidden cameras, including concealed phones everytime you go to the doctor?

            Again, it has happened, but when it’s single digit instances out of thousands or millions of doctors, that’s almost never.

            • joe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              You said “hidden cameras aren’t common” but cameras that can be easily hidden are extremely common. If I misunderstood what you meant when you said they weren’t common, I apologize.

              No, I don’t because I trust my doctor.

              Which was my original point; it’s interesting that people have two seemingly different types of trust with their doctor. They, apparently, trust them not to be a secret creep, but they don’t seem to trust them not to be a blatant creep.

              It reminds me of some saying I read once that goes something like “If you tell a person there are a billion stars in the night sky, they’ll take your word for it, but if you tell that person there’s wet paint on a bench, they’ll have to touch it to believe you.”

              It’s just an interesting phenomenon, that the same person can be trusted and not trusted regarding essentially the same action.

              • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 hour ago

                I see what you’re saying. When I say not common, I mean I trust that it’s not common or likely for a doctor to secretly use a phone or other hidden camera, whatever method that may be, to record, not that the phones themselves are uncommon.

                I think one big difference between the two is I trust my doctor, but if they walked in with a recording device on their face I would immediately lose all of that trust even if they said it wasn’t recording. If I saw my doctor walk in with their phone camera exposed, I would also have concerns, but less than the glasses, mostly because the glasses have one function, and that’s recording. Seeing a phone would mean there could be malicious behavior, but not necessarily. It would be something that I would bring up if noticed.

                At the end of the day, you have to have some level of trust or you’ll go crazy. It’s easy to trust that your doctor isn’t secretly recording you, but not so much when they’re exposing the camera to you.