1 edit
@moonbus saidIf one lives a clean legal life, why would he care about showing up on camera ? One exception would be if I were closing a secret deal, and was entering a building that I wanted to keep private, I would make precautions with a mustache or hat, to go unnoticed, to be sure that my deal would not be compromised.
The disappearance of an infant, or nationwide network of video surveillance cameras ??
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/28/uk/aristocrat-partner-arrest-missing-baby-gbr-intl-scli/index.html
So, I have no problem with the cameras, so yes, the child matter is creepier.
@shavixmir saidHa! You are like my wrestling with ...abort or not abort!!!!
Very interesting conundrum.
Privacy vs criminality.
I’ll get back to ya all on this one.
2 edits
@averagejoe1 saidAn honest man has nothing to fear from an honest government.
If one lives a clean legal life, why would he care about showing up on camera ? One exception would be if I were closing a secret deal, and was entering a building that I wanted to keep private, I would make precautions with a mustache or hat, to go unnoticed, to be sure that my deal would not be compromised.
So, I have no problem with the cameras, so yes, the child matter is creepier.
Personally, I think a surveillance state is creepier, because the potential for abuse is uncontrolled. All it takes is one fascist administration, and the mechanism is already in place to no longer get them out of power without major civil convulsions. Happened in Germany, Greece, Spain, and Italy, all in the previous century. Don’t think it can’t happen in the UK.
Of course, I am concerned for the infant, fear the worst and hope for the best.
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidWell, no.
Ha! You are like my wrestling with ...abort or not abort!!!!
One is a woman’s body and her choice and people trying to influence her personal body space.
The other is privacy vs utility.
It’s completely different.
@endlame saidThen I'll tell you a bit about it. It's a story of manipulation of the image seen on cctv.
@yo-its-me
Not yet.
I only have Netflix and tubi
It's not so far fetched imo, obviously it's fiction, but there was a display of similar technology on a TV show...I'll find it...
@moonbus saidOf course I agree, and indeed, it would be misused. But we were given just two clear things to pick from. Are we OK with the surveillance or not.
An honest man has nothing to fear from an honest government.
Personally, I think a surveillance state is creepier, because the potential for abuse is uncontrolled. All it takes is one fascist administration, and the mechanism is already in place to no longer get them out of power without major civil convulsions. Happened in Germany, Greece, Spain, and Italy, all in the pre ...[text shortened]... happen in the UK.
Of course, I am concerned for the infant, fear the worst and hope for the best.
Libs will often take a thread, like 'This guy was wealthy, and he had a yacht, and he went here and there..' whatever, and one of you will say what if he got the money illegally', which totally changes the issue.
Same thing here. We are taking about safe legal cameras that are there to be sure something can be traced if legally necessary in the future. Y'all just kill us with the what-ifs. Marauder does it so much he does not even know he is doing it. We should all stay on issue, it is much more fun....even if we lose one or two!
@moonbus saidOkay…
The disappearance of an infant, or nationwide network of video surveillance cameras ??
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/28/uk/aristocrat-partner-arrest-missing-baby-gbr-intl-scli/index.html
Legally:
To place cameras to that extent, one has to weigh up various aspects:
Privacy impact compared to benefits to society.
You have to argue its proportionality (is it really that worthwhile).
You have to argue its subsidiarity (can the same benefits be achieved with less impact on privacy).
You have to make it very clear with which goals the cameras can be used, what the authorisarion matrix is (who can view the images for which reasons and how long) and how long images are retained.
Generally a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) will be used in the EU (and still something similar in the UK, because it’s got third country adequacy) to acertain all of this.
So, legally, it is possible to maintain such a system of cameras.
TV shows show a great deal of benefits from such cameras. I don’t know what the truth is. How many kids are actually kidnapped and found, because of the camera network?
How many criminals in general?
How often are the camera images misused? Are there data breaches? Is there an over-watch installed to counter-act all this?
Doesn’t the camera network just lead to people abducting kids where there is no camera surveillance? So, generally, where there is less social control anyway?
Has this been measured?
Can we see facts and figures on these trends? How open is the information on the cameras?
Probably not the sort of answer you expected…
@yo-its-me saidAnother tv show talking about the shady side of surveillance was Person of Interest. It ran from 2011-2016 on CBS.
Then I'll tell you a bit about it. It's a story of manipulation of the image seen on cctv.
It's not so far fetched imo, obviously it's fiction, but there was a display of similar technology on a TV show...I'll find it...
https://youtu.be/ddxAPQJrj-0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_Interest_(TV_series)
@averagejoe1 saidYou surprise me, Joe. Aren’t you the one with a visceral distrust of big government? the potential for misuse of surveillance technology is very great, yet you’re willing to believe that not only the present administration, but all future administrations, act in good faith. I don’t know how old you are, but I’m old enough to remember that then-president Nixon used the FBI to spy on his political opponents. Don’t think that can’t happen again.
Of course I agree, and indeed, it would be misused. But we were given just two clear things to pick from. Are we OK with the surveillance or not.
Libs will often take a thread, like 'This guy was wealthy, and he had a yacht, and he went here and there..' whatever, and one of you will say what if he got the money illegally', which totally changes the issue.
Sa ...[text shortened]... now he is doing it. We should all stay on issue, it is much more fun....even if we lose one or two!