I'm all for stationary government surveillance EVERYWHERE (in the public), just no surveillance ANYWHERE on individual persons. I think what people do in public should be heavily witnessed and recorded.
I'm all for stationary government surveillance EVERYWHERE (in the public), just no surveillance ANYWHERE on individual persons. I think what people do in public should be heavily witnessed and recorded.
I think what people do in public should be heavily witnessed and recorded
What for? I don't understand why you want to record some stranger jogging, drinking coffee, smoking, eating or simply walking and minding their own business. What am I missing?
Temporarily it's fine. Store it for a few weeks and then destroy. If something happens to the jogger on their jog we can grab the video, if nothing happens, it's deleted.
That sets the stage for overreach. If the data is public, and you are getting stalked, there is nowhere to hide. If corporations/organizations/agencies want to exploit your emotions for ads at any given moment of the day because they can see you and almost everything that happens to you, they can. If a lunatic leader gets elected who wants to kill off a specific group of people (nothing lasts forever, including political stability), its now much easier. With all that in mind, can I ask why?
Everyone seems to suggest the above narratives, but in truth this is just not the case. Maybe for 0.0000001% of the time it is the narratives above. But the truth is, if Putin or Jay Jones wants someone dead he will get the right spy and do it without a massive surveillance net.
No, the vast majority of the use case is stopping crime that today we can't stop. I want the crime to stop.
I was thinking more along the lines of cultural/opinion suppression or genocide. This is a very similar type of infrastructure.
https://apnews.com/article/chinese-surveillance-silicon-vall...
The way I see it, there are bad people everywhere (even in the government).
https://local12.com/news/nation-world/police-chief-gets-caug...
And, in a safe country like this one (I am in the United States but most developed countries are pretty safe), if a little petty crime is so scary to them that they need a mass surveillance network to sleep at night... I don't see any reason why the public should have to sacrifice potential freedoms for that weakness.
Why stop at the public? Crimes are committed in private too, you know. I have an idea — let’s increase the scope of surveillance to private activities as well. If everyone is surveilled, then really, no individual person is surveilled, right? This only works if we install surveillance everywhere though, with no exceptions.
Because that's not what I'm for. Goal post shifter. A lot of crimes people travel to a private location by going through public places. Perhaps when we have Star Trek transporters we'll need to go in that direction.
Which is actually a thing in Star Trek - they literally solve crimes by tracking exactly where people are and check transporter logs for where people go.
[dead]