I would say, to be pedantic, that your pay isn't set by the market "really," because of market distortions of all kinds.
Like doctors are highly paid for a number of reasons one of which is cause the APA restricts the number of doctors that can be trained, but also because of the nature of the finance of healthcare in America, and the cost of training doctors. None of those is determined purely based on the market really.
A distorted market is still a market. Considering there has never in history been a market completely free of distortion due to authority figures, I don't see the distinction you're making.
How is the right to privacy being violated though?
Imagine you were a stripper or porn actress, your right to privacy wouldn't preclude someone recognizing you at the strip club or video.
Or suppose you went to the strip club or watched a video and then also happened to be on Facebook and saw the profile of someone you saw stripping at a strip club or in the video, matching the face and name in your head.
How is the slow case different fundamentally from the case where programming is used and throughput and speed is much higher and faster?
I mean would it be illegal for someone to just start going through Facebook profiles by hand trying to find an actress they just saw?
The right of privacy is violated if someone that wanted to stay anonomous is defamed. Doing searched automatically is also very different from doing it manually. But even if it's done manually, defaming someone still goes against their right to privacy.
What if we're not talking about strippers or porn actresses. What if we're talking about some random person who let a partner take photos/videos of them, in confidence and in private?
In my opinion, if you let your partner do that, you deserve it. If you do that, and later come surprised if such situation happens, you are literally an idiot, not knowing in what age you live in.
So, understand what your fetish means and how it can backfire. Any age will have its own problems like that.
If the videos are published, and the social media profiles public, how can it be illegal to match the two? Supposedly if they show their face they already accept the danger of being recognized, unless the video was published illegally.
That said, why would someone, once someone was identified, just go about harassing them and telling all their friends they do porn? Like who does that?
The internet has enabled some people to deploy complex systems into New York datacenters from a beach in Thailand in a matter of seconds.
Unfortunately, it's also enabled a selection of less socially aware and/or socially responsible people to bypass the natural limits and filters that society had in place, to effectively cause suffering on a fairly broad scale.
Harrassing somebody on the other side of the world from the safe anonymity of your bedroom was once logistically very difficult, as was reaching significant numbers of people with a wildly malicious idea if you couldn't first find people in your immediate (physical) social circle and community to vouch for you/it.
Now, we have entire online communities which have embraced this new normal and provided these folk with the tools and an audience.
My guess is there are many that did porn when they were younger (and foolish?) but have since moved on with life and might want to forget that episode or their life. So having it resurface 10 years later would be very uncomfortable.
I never said your grandfather (though I did use my grand parents as an anecdote to point how far society has come)...I said, literally 10 years ago, even 20 years ago. Life is better now; and once again, most students only carry around ~$5K in student debt, the vast majority of student debt is carried by 10% of students. There is no way you can convince me that your living standards are now lower than they were in the 90s or 10 years ago; everyone is living in nostalgia for the past...people have been saying "the good ole days" forever, and yet lives continue to be improved and poor people are lifted from poverty despite this longing for the "good ole days."
The interesting part is the historical contingency of the distribution, that is based not just on rational economic principles but purposeful policy.
For example, you would need to explain why up from post-war until the mid-70s you see increases in income for most people basically matching increases in productivity, and why today there is a disjunction between the two.
Which is ironic since the US has been becoming increasingly less "free." Like state elections, the ways congressional districts are gerrymandered, and the enormous outsized voice capital has in the functioning of our government and elections: I'm not sure how much we have on other nominally less free countries sometimes.
And according to the heritage foundation the US isn't even in the top 10 most free economies, and that's the sort of thing people who are swayed by that particular jedi mind trick like.
Is natural gas used to cool houses in Europe? I thought natural gas was mostly used for heating. In the UK at least many house lack air conditioning. I can't speak about the continent.
The article in question refers to Liquified Natural Gas - it has many uses but in this particular case it's used to generate electricity in power plants.
Like doctors are highly paid for a number of reasons one of which is cause the APA restricts the number of doctors that can be trained, but also because of the nature of the finance of healthcare in America, and the cost of training doctors. None of those is determined purely based on the market really.