Non photos - venting alert

I have no idea what this is about. Sounds really weird.

GrannyGravy13

fancythat

Once they are out there, they are out there for ever…

But does that matter?

That is what I am not grasping.

Unscrupulous people on the dark web can put facial images into AI and produce pornographic images both still and moving.

Not something I want to happen to my family members, especially the children.

But people would never know. In most circumstances.

And why should it "just happen" to be, those particular photos?
[I do realise in special circumstances that could happen].

paddyann54

Whats hard to understand?
Michael Jackson was I think the first celebrity who covered his children’s faces…..to secure their privacy .As he had been in the glare of camera his whole life he wanted HIS children to be able to walk down any street without being followed by paparazzi,given Harry,s fears after his mother died during a chase by paparazzi of course he,ll do his best to keep their faces anonymous.
I couldn,t care less about seeing pictures of children apart from those close to me and we don’t put them online for everyone to view.
It’s a strange old world out there and better safe than sorry.

But Harry's children will always be photographed.
Whatever he does.
Unless he becomes a recluse with them.

Michael Jackson may just have got away with it.

fancythat

GrannyGravy13

fancythat

Once they are out there, they are out there for ever…

But does that matter?

That is what I am not grasping.

Unscrupulous people on the dark web can put facial images into AI and produce pornographic images both still and moving.

Not something I want to happen to my family members, especially the children.

But people would never know. In most circumstances.

And why should it "just happen" to be, those particular photos?
[I do realise in special circumstances that could happen].

Chances must be 10,000 to 1.

I think that is what I gleaned from the person in real life I was speaking to.

It was actually her anxiousness that was talking.

Sorry this is hard to follow,inflict what? Photo's of what or who, why did I bother reading,following to see if I could fathom it out,I do like a riddle but I'm beaten, time I can't get back

Shel1951

Sorry this is hard to follow,inflict what? Photo's of what or who, why did I bother reading,following to see if I could fathom it out,I do like a riddle but I'm beaten, time I can't get back

🤣😂🤣😂🤣

If a non-famous couple posted non-revealing photos of their children, would it even be worthy of discussion? Most parents with an ounce of sense limit online images, particularly when facial recognition tech plus AI generated images have become so much of a problem. You don’t need to be Mark Zuckerberg to connect the dots here.

Parents are allowed to decide social media exposure for their children. This shouldn’t even remotely be confusing.

I’m more perplexed at adults moaning over not seeing the faces of children they don’t even know. It’s strange, and that’s putting it mildly.

I understand why people take a pic just showing the back of a child’s head or their hand or foot etc., but why do it at all would be my question??
If they want to keep their kids off the net, and I can fully appreciate this, then they should do so and not post silly pics of a child’s limb from the back.

No one forces anyone to look at anyone’s social media pics. No one should be bothered enough to dictate what others post.

People post what they like. At what point was there a rule made up that said “if you are famous you must post pics of what the public would like to see or not at all?” At what point did we assign ourselves this authority? Unless there is a safety or legality issue, we need to dial it back with deciding which pics are acceptable for others to share of their children. It’s silly and a bit weird that we think our opinions should dictate anyone’s personal social media pages.

Nana8 I agree, what is this about ???
What are you talking about Fallingstar ???

I ve never seen a picture of a limb from the back was it joined onto anything or just floating in mid air ?
Can you not be more specific about what you are upset
about ?

BlueBelle

Nana8 I agree, what is this about ???
What are you talking about Fallingstar ???

I ve never seen a picture of a limb from the back was it joined onto anything or just floating in mid air ?
Can you not be more specific about what you are upset
about ?

Am not upset about it, just joining in.
On the grand scale of things going on in my life it doesn’t even make a ripple but was simply replying to the OP.
I don’t know why posters presume somebody is upset about something.
And really there is no further clarification in case anyone thinks I am getting even more upset.
Will wish you all a good day.

Fallingstar

I understand why people take a pic just showing the back of a child’s head or their hand or foot etc., but why do it at all would be my question??
If they want to keep their kids off the net, and I can fully appreciate this, then they should do so and not post silly pics of a child’s limb from the back.

Exactly.

Putting it better than I did.

No one forces anyone to look at anyone’s social media pics.

It is in our face almost every day.

No choice if want to read or see any media.

Sorry Fallingstar I got my effs muddled up my question was meant for fancythat I ve still no idea what she’s on about ???

BlueBelle

Sorry Fallingstar I got my effs muddled up my question was meant for fancythat I ve still no idea what she’s on about ???

Thanks for clearing that up. 💐

BlessedArt

No one forces anyone to look at anyone’s social media pics. No one should be bothered enough to dictate what others post.

👍👍👍👍👏👏👏👏

fancythat

^No one forces anyone to look at anyone’s social media pics.^

It is in our face almost every day.

No choice if want to read or see any media.

It really isn’t

Or it could it just be that it truly doesn’t bother me at all, so I simply don’t notice?

I can’t tell you the last time I saw a H&M social media post that wasn’t linked to Mumsnet or Gransnet.

Fallingstar

I understand why people take a pic just showing the back of a child’s head or their hand or foot etc., but why do it at all would be my question??
If they want to keep their kids off the net, and I can fully appreciate this, then they should do so and not post silly pics of a child’s limb from the back.

There’s a semi famous person that I follow on instagram that shows her glamorous lifestyle and includes the back of her children’s heads and I realised the other day that I found it irritating.

Thank you.

In real life, I am far from the only one.

Just to say - Princess Beatrice never shows the faces of her children but Princess Eugenie does.

Actually, there are so many dreadful things happening in the world at the moment that I’m surprised that people get their knickers in a knot over such inconsequential stuff as whether people blank their children’s faces out or not.

Ladyleftfieldlover

Just to say - Princess Beatrice never shows the faces of her children but Princess Eugenie does.

Actually, there are so many dreadful things happening in the world at the moment that I’m surprised that people get their knickers in a knot over such inconsequential stuff as whether people blank their children’s faces out or not.

Well, it isn’t a big deal and doesn’t exactly take over my life but I like to think I’m quite a nice’ish person and it’s reassuring to know that other nice’ish people feel the same way.

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
I think OP’s objection belongs in the first category