Are the group photos when passing out of Raleigh, mandatory?

janner

MIA
Book Reviewer
#1
I think that the OP is so ugly that he will stand out in the photo, he is quite rightly concerned that this will make him an easily indentified target.
 
#2
I think that the OP is so ugly that he will stand out in the photo, he is quite rightly concerned that this will make him an easily indentified target.
Well whether it's ugly or pretty, the AI algorithms won't care and I frankly don't want for instance FB to analyse my face. I should think this is an OPSEC issue, partially. I mean I would like to be social, but I think it's archaic these days, to include these pictures. Because people WILL share them online and while for old times sake it could be nice, I think people should be able to hide their faces or somehow be shielded from the privacy repercussions. But since such few people think of this and most just go along with it, I wondered if there was any recourse for the tech-conscious like myself.

That said, I'm glad you're encouraging introspection. However if I am indeed ugly, that's not my problem, as it won't be me who has to look at it.

But honestly, it's worrying if there's before and after group pictures. I can't imagine saying no, because the armed forces rely on the sense of community and camaraderie so much, that to refuse, would invite social isolation.
 
#3
Well if having your picture taken is worrying, dare I ask your opinion on joining an armed force and getting possibly getting shot at!!!!!
Now that would worry me more than a course photo.
All I can say is get used to it as most courses have a course piccy.
As an aside, has anyone had any hassles because of being identified from any course photo's. After 24 years worth some in the limelight courtesy of my role in SAR and such - no-one has so much as said boo to be as a result of appearing on tv and course photo's!!!
 
#6
Ooh the embarrassment when your parents/loved ones get out the old photos and you see how skin and essence you used to be (and had hair).

I am with you on this Waspie, although I have never done SAR, I have had my fair share of course/team photos and never had any comeback. Then again, this is as close to social media as I get.

It is not compulsory to have a face ache account!
 
#7
Well if having your picture taken is worrying, dare I ask your opinion on joining an armed force and getting possibly getting shot at!!!!!
Now that would worry me more than a course photo.
All I can say is get used to it as most courses have a course piccy.
As an aside, has anyone had any hassles because of being identified from any course photo's. After 24 years worth some in the limelight courtesy of my role in SAR and such - no-one has so much as said boo to be as a result of appearing on tv and course photo's!!!
Ha, good joke. Maybe your age makes you unable to appreciate this issue, because it wasn't a concern in your time. I'm not scared of being shot at. It's simply a fact that these days, privacy is threatened and as with the Met Police using facial recognition at the WW1 Cenotaph, I shouldn't have to fork over highly personal info, just for serving the country IMO. So it's not necessarily due to a fear of being attacked for example, but due to the PRINCIPLE of not having your privacy violated, just so that 15 other strangers and half a dozen american companies and their friends in the ad industry, can scan your face, catalogue you and otherwise spread your image around as they please. I think if the pictures were strictly non-digital, with sharing something to be punished, then that would help. But otherwise it's just reckless sharing of data and frankly, in a democracy, that's dangerous. It's the same deal when companies want access to NHS health data: you can argue it's not a big deal, that it's not scary and so on. But in the end, it's harmful, it's risky and it's a violation of your rights.

I understand the social value of group pictures. But this is a thing which has been in place since forever, since when people couldn't just connect on FB and chat up old friends. So, as with the newly minted awareness of things like environmental pollution, privacy must also be considered. It's beneficial for all, including the RN, to do so.

For you, if you're interested:
I also think it's frankly ridiculous to talk about PERSEC, OPSEC and whatnot and not support these kinds of ideas, institutionally.
 
#8
Why OPSEC?

I can understand your concerns about PERSEC but in what way would a group pic from Raleigh affect operational security?
Sorry, I meant PERSEC. Although as I understand, the RN has to adapt to the new generation of sailors who demand online access and thus an awareness of the issues I'm raising, could help.
 
#9
Another question then.
What happens when either a media photographer or a member of the public takes your picture from outside the wire. (Off MoD land) Of you in uniform! Its quiet legal to photograph MoD sites, unlike other countries, Turkey for one.
Its outside your control and even MoD Police have no powers as long as the image has no classified detail in it.
 
#10
Another question then.
What happens when either a media photographer or a member of the public takes your picture from outside the wire. (Off MoD land) Of you in uniform! Its quiet legal to photograph MoD sites, unlike other countries, Turkey for one.
Its outside your control and even MoD Police have no powers as long as the image has no classified detail in it.
You already know what happens: I begrudgingly accept it, while hoping they don't share it online if the image is clear enough to identify me and they get a picture which hopefully inspires a mixture of awe, envy and lust. Naturally, if I'm wearing a mask for example, I don't mind at all. But I want a choice. That's what this is about: control over who gets to know what about you. It's a human right.

But it's not about the practical side of it. It's about the ethical firstly and then secondly, the arrangement of the technology. Essentially, it's not about barring technology. It's about using it in a way which benefits us as much as possible. Currently for example, when you use an app on your phone, that app may get access to your contacts, location, call history and whatever else and it might just be a flashlight app. That's ridiculous. Likewise, when you go to websites, do they use things like Google Analytics? If so, they shouldn't. And so on and so on. Ther's many aspects to this question and that's why it's complicated. It's not like "womens rights", where the name itself allows us all to know what we think of it, instantly. But I'm focusing on the group pictures, because it's mandatory and I know it will get shared, which makes me uncomfortable. Who says a foreign company has a right to scan my face for example? No one. Who says a foreign company, whom I don't associate with, has a right to know that I met so and such or did XYZ thing at XYZ place? No one. What if they abuse it in some way? I won't know and if I do, how would I stop i? The thing is, it's the collection and analysis itself, which is abusive.
 
#11
so what have you not told the RN are you a wanted man by police, mafia, debt collectors? Security has always been part of service life, but hiding in the broom cupboard is not the answer, once out with your mates your face will be all over FB by the end of the first round, if you become a squirrel then fair enough. Enjoy your time.
 
#12
With your concerns over a group photo, I assume if you do the Guard at Remembrance Day at the Cenotaph (or any other public engagement you can, and will, be called on to perform), you'll be the one with a paper bag over your head?
 
#13
so what have you not told the RN are you a wanted man by police, mafia, debt collectors? Security has always been part of service life, but hiding in the broom cupboard is not the answer, once out with your mates your face will be all over FB by the end of the first round, if you become a squirrel then fair enough. Enjoy your time.
You seem to equate privacy with having something to hide. This is not the case. The house analogy is good:

You're in a house and it has a lock on the door. Thus it's secure. This is what companies mean when they say they keep your data safe - that it's resistant to theft, from hackers for example. But just because it's safe, it doesn't mean it's also private, as the perpetrator or anyone else, could still peek in the windows - so Google and Facebook might be quite safe for example, but they're not at all private, as they guzzle data about you like there's no tomorrow. So, privacy is akin to having curtains for the windows, because you're in control of who gets to know and see what, about your life. There's nothing malicious or untoward about it. Of course, you *could* be a mass-murdering knobhead eitherway, but that's just not so for most people. So, in the digital age, privacy is critical, precisely because all these companies collect as much information as they can. This info then needs to be secured too and many fail at this - hence all the stories about great hacks. While if they didn't collect any information at all, then there wouldn't be anything to hack and thus we'd all be safer. I also don't use FB and thus I find it contemptible that information about me, should end up on it - after all, I didn't agree their to EULA or Terms of Service. Yet now it knows something about me and it only needs to know exceedingly little, to make highly accurate predictions; this is the effect of Big Data (large samples of data which computers analyse to find hidden connections). Sure, maybe you can't think up a solution to all this, but why does that make it anymore acceptable? That's complacency. So I just think these sorts of considerations should be made, as they benefit us all. Plus, what ****** has his phone out, on a night out anyway? There's some carpe diem stuff in there somewhere.


@WreckerL
No - although if the RN suddenly decides they want to partner up with Walkers crisps and need a mascot who's head will be draped in a bag with two holes in it and a promotion for crisps with a sea salt taste, I might volunteer. But I'd be extremely unhappy and angry, depending on what's disclosed, without such protection. Of course I wouldn't bother anyone with it, but I'd probably feel it seething within, honestly, for a little while; if I think it could be done better. The thing is, I don't mind doing public stuff either. Just like I don't mind technology. It's the misuse and lack of thoughtful implementation I'm against, chiefly.
 
Last edited:
#14
That would be his choice would it not?

Passing out at Raleigh and having your photo taken is not optional.

If anyone is on Twitter, have a look at the HMS Raleigh account. There are daily updates, complete with class photos, of the recruits.

If the RN decrees that the publication of photos of serving personnel is fine and all part of the package, then that is how it is. But doesn't that then make all this PERSEC, eg "don't post where you're travelling from" a bit hypocritical?
Great example, thank you. I don't use Twitter either for example, so why in Gods name should my face be on it? It's such a gimmick, in an attempt to feel like one is keeping with the times, I feel. It's especially awkward I think, that a branch of the British armed forces, should be handing out information on its recruits to a foreign company as well. But chiefly it's about the misuse of people's data.
 
#15
You can opt out of being in any photographs taken at HMS Raleigh. This means that you will not appear on Twitter and you will not be in your pass out photograph


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#16
Methinks maybe the RN or any of the services come to that, may not be the ideal occupation. As photographs are a matter of fact. No choice!
Entry into some of the more classified roles would mean passing through the main stream service before entry into the 'secret' world of the armed forces.
Of course there could be the Photographic branch. That way you could be behind the camera and be in a position to modify images if you did have another snapper snap you!!! Doesn't help at HMS Raleigh though!!! Back to square one!
 
#17
You can opt out of being in any photographs taken at HMS Raleigh. This means that you will not appear on Twitter and you will not be in your pass out photograph


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If that's true, that's re-assuring. Unless it's encouraged though, the peer pressure to conform will be immense. Because of course it's nice to get a picture, so you can think back to that time, 30 years on. But anyhow, thank you.
 
#19
Which brand of tin foil should I take to rally for my hat?
What has this got to do with tin foil hats? Is it such a foreign concept to you, that some people desire greater control over what gets shared about them? And while I can't recommend any specific brand sadly, I can tell you that if they worked, I'd probably get one. There's certainly plenty reason to do so. This personal data stuff, should become accepted as something you can control and decline the use of, by third parties. Much like how you don't pressure people to drink if they don't want to or otherwise harass them, etc.
 
#20
when you venture into Plymouth on one of your limited liberties, you will enter a city with more cameras than most, good luck in avoiding then, or don't go ashore just sit in your cupboard with your mates
 

Top