I have not even read the article at link below and I am already furious. > What kind of property rights exist in mixed reality? My answer is NONE! None of it exists. My eyes, my rules. We have existing laws regarding libel and slander which in my opinion is already too onerous. > such as how someone (the owner, law enforcement, etc.) would even know that there was a tag at all My counter question is why do they need to know? Now there is an interesting question of gatekeepers: Who gets to vet the data?& That is a good question. I think there should be no gatekeepers but in reality we will have big players who will effectively act as gatekeepers even if we don't have one by law. I don't like to admit this but it is true. It leads to the next good question: What qualifies as exclusion / discrimination? To this one, I want to refer to Wikipedia. What counts as exclusion/discrimination on Wikipedia? Does Wikipedia have an obligation to write articles about everyone? Are deletionists criminals? Matt makes some good points but none of them warrant new thinking with regards to augmented reality. What we decide here has to apply broadly. This also means what applies broadly also applies here (which is a more uncomfortable admission I have to say).
https://shift.newco.co/weve-not-thought-through-the-legal-and-ethical-disruption-of-augmented-reality-e244769c6e9b?gi=c865236848ab archived at https://archive.fo/3Nwxq