Non photos - venting alert

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.

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.

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 ?

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.

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

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.

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.

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

🤣😂🤣😂🤣

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

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.

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.

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.

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].

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

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.

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.

I am probably more concerned about what I write on here, than photos. Personally.

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

But does that matter?

That is what I am not grasping.

The general public were warned that back to school photos posted online showing too much information (house number, car registration, school badges/insignias) were not a good idea in the current climate of insecure social media sites and AI manipulation of images.

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

Well of we're venting, and I don't spend much time worrying about this, but people posting any photos of themselves (let alone their children!) I find short sighted. But millions upon millions do.
Just the other day I watched a video from a woman complaining google had compiled a file on her and her family, by using all the photos and I suppose other info she had uploaded over the years. Which included her children and other relatives.
They had previous addresses she had lived at.
Dont forget, everything on line is stored and sold/used for future reference.

A school photo is perfectly ruined, to me, by a blanked out face.

I do understand there are occasional very good reasons, but that is merely occasional.
For instance, if a child has been fostered.

But it is what they inflict on others.

Dont think I am the only one who really really doesnt like it.

Does seem to be a waste of time but each to their own.

fancythat

People posting photos that block out faces.

Thank you!

And anything else people want to vent about today.