But if you have any kind of normal social ties, that opting out always feels a little bit futile.

Yeah.

So again, if you've seen the movie The Lives of Others or any documentary about the Stasi, you see at the end of that movie, they show the archives.

And they have so many pages of documents, massive archives, more than any human being could ever go through.

And so one way of looking at that is, well, this is one natural nice downside of the surveillance state is that we just can't do that much with all that information.

Well, now we do have tools to work with all that information and to do inferences about you from other people.

So the idea of individual opting out, it doesn't just seem sort of individualistic anymore.

But like what's up with that?

What's your argument defending her? What was her argument and, and tell us what you think of it?

Um, I mean, so the argument there is, is basically the one, um, that we were, um, just, uh, giving.

Um, but let, let me say that, uh, I don't want to be taken to say that it's harmful to have one's photograph taken or that it's bad to take pictures or that like...

These are like...

There, there are serious moral stakes in all picture taking.

On the one hand, the, the intuitions about the Svendsen photos and about photography in general, which we still have, I think reveal a certain view of the person, which we still have, and it's the kind of view of the person that makes privacy relevant to us.

We thought we were different.

And why is that oblivion, uh, that we can have when we're in private, why is it important for my, my own personal wellbeing and development?