Apparently Your Fence Isn't High Enough

So, Apparently Your Fence Isn't High Enough The $12,500 Ass-Cheeks of Google Street View

It should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone that the internet remains, and will forever be, the wild, wild west. But even I raised an eyebrow reading this one. Some dude down in Argentina, apparently a policeman (because LOL, irony never dies) just got awarded a princely sum twelve thousand, five hundred dollars, USD because Google Street View decided his backyard mooning, entirely accidental, was prime real estate for their surveillance vans.

His lawyer’s pitch? "Harm to his dignity." You know, because his bare behind got immortalized and then, get this, his house number and street name also got "laid bare" on Argentine TV. It's funny because it's not funny. The guy was behind a 6 1/2-foot wall. SIX AND A HALF FEET. And somehow, Google's all-seeing eye, that glorious all-knowing algorithm, managed to capture him, "from behind," in all his glory.

Conclusion: Your fence? Yeah, it's not high enough. Your "privacy"? Pretty much a suggestion, not a right.

Another court actually dismissed his claim last year. Said he "only had himself to blame for walking around in inappropriate conditions in the garden of his home." OBVIOUSLY. Because when I’m chilling in my backyard, I should assume a multi-billion dollar tech giant is going to send a camera car by, actively scoping out my bush. My garden bush, you sickos.

This is the kind of stuff that just makes your brain spin. What exactly do people think "privacy" is going to accomplish anyway when you've got tech companies basically saying, "Sorry, your wall was inadequate. You were basically asking to be put on the internet." It’s like when Bitcoin dipped hard and everyone said it was because you didn't HODL hard enough. Nonsense.

Part of the reason why this whole thing is so spectacularly annoying is the sheer arrogance of it all. Google, for its part, claimed the perimeter wall was not high enough. They’re basically saying, "We have a right to your visual data, and if your architectural choices prevent us from acquiring it, that’s your problem." This isn't just about nudity, it’s about the pervasive nature of digital surveillance and these companies pushing the boundaries until someone, bless their heart, manages to claw back a meager sum.

Twelve thousand five hundred dollars. That's, what, enough cash for a few months' worth of groceries, maybe a used car? For your dignity to be collectively smeared across the internet for all eternity? Is this really what privacy is worth in 2025? (Yes, I know the article says 2017 incident, but this payout is happening now, so the digital scars are fresh).

I guess the moral of the story is if you want to avoid ending up like the "Argentine mooner," either build a 20-foot wall, wear a full hazmat suit in your own backyard, or just don't go outside. Or maybe, just maybe, leverage the blockchain where you actually own your data. But that’s another rant entirely.

Until then, stay clothed, stay vigilant, and maybe invest in some really tall hedges. Just kidding I already know everyone here is already completely exhausted.

Found some value in this little deep dive? Maybe even a chuckle or two? If so, and you want to support more of this unfiltered insight (or just my ability to pay for more coffee), a vote for my Hive Witness would be pretty sweet. Thanks for sticking around!

Posted Using INLEO