Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

routefifty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 132 posts

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#71

Post by jascii »

AJRF wrote: post #9

Top 20 1. Chongqing, China – 2,579,890 cameras for 15,354,067 people = 168.03 cameras per 1,000 people 2. Shenzhen, China – 1,929,600 cameras for 12,128,721 people = 159.09 cameras per 1,000 people 3. Shanghai, China – 2,985,984 cameras for 26,317,104 people = 113.46 cameras per 1,000 people 4. Tianjin, China – 1,244,160 cameras for 13,396,402 people = 92.87 cameras per 1,000 people 5. Ji’nan, China – 540,463 cameras…

Hmm, they are quoting a population of 20,035,455 for Beijing. That's the official number based on the amount of residency permits. Locals estimate the actual population to be at least double that..

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#72

Post by mindcrime »

Here's what I find interesting, and maybe slightly disturbing: there was a time when if you took a highly techie focused site like this, and posted an article on this topic, a significant portion of the responses would include variations of: "how do we hack these things to disable them?" or "How can we avoid being spotted on camera", or "How about we get together and start physically destroying these things" or "Let's vote out the bums who allowed this to happen", etc.

These days? All we get is pedantic quibbling over what counts as "surveilled", and what's the most appropriate metric for calculating how surveilled a place is.

I'm not sure exactly what that says about our society and culture, but I'm pretty sure I don't like it.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#73

Post by sandworm101 »

r00fus wrote: post #61
sandworm101 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What matters more than the number of cameras is how/if the cameras are integrated. I don't much care that the local gas station has cameras tied to a 30-day DVR. I expect that. I don't expect them to be connected to facial-recognition AI, networked to the national police, and be feeding my movements into a citizenship score system that will impact my future job prospects.

How would one calculate that score?

Parked too far from pump -1. Didn't check air pressure in tires -1. Drove too quickly -1. Yawned too much, driving while tired -10 points. Did have correct national flag in rear window +1. That is all easily within current AI abilities.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#74

Post by Infernal »

omarhaneef wrote: post #5

My first thought was: how is NYC not on this list since it has cameras on every block, and has for decades. And then I saw this: "Atlanta was the only place in the U.S. to crack the top ten, with 15.56 cameras per thousand residents." So they are looking at cameras per 1000 residents. This seems like the wrong way to count. If you point a camera at a block, you see everyone on that block whether there is one person o…

Agreed. By the per capita metric my pants have 2000 cameras per 1000 inhabitants.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#75

Post by sandworm101 »

r00fus wrote: post #64
sandworm101 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How deep was this list? I expect that places like Quantico Virginia might have more cameras. Quanitico has a population of around 500 people, but it right beside bases for the Army, FBI, DEA ... basically everyone that really really likes cameras.

Is Quantico considered a civilian area? Can I visit?

It's just a town, like Roswell, but instead of EBEs and UFOs it has g-men and drones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantico,_Virginia

"There are no significant highways passing through Quantico. All road vehicles must pass through MCB Quantico in order to reach the town. Therefore, all vehicle drivers must present a valid driver’s license to the military security officer stationed at the gate, and may be required to state their destination and reason for visiting. More thorough searches and checks may also be undertaken, according to the discretion and authority of base security.[10]

Amtrak and Virginia Railway Express trains stop at the Quantico station."

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#76

Post by anigbrowl »

sweezyjeezy wrote: post #19
omarhaneef wrote: post #5

My first thought was: how is NYC not on this list since it has cameras on every block, and has for decades. And then I saw this: "Atlanta was the only place in the U.S. to crack the top ten, with 15.56 cameras per thousand residents." So they are looking at cameras per 1000 residents. This seems like the wrong way to count. If you point a camera at a block, you see everyone on that block whether there is one person o…

Yeah, it also conflates private/publicly owned cameras. As someone who lives in London, I think we get unfairly portrayed as a surveillance state, because really the vast majority of cameras are inside shops and businesses, not on the street, and not connected to any central databank. I personally don't find cameras like these troubling. Once you get out of central London, most streets don't have cameras on them.

Central London was a surveillance state more than 20 years ago.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#77

Post by JohnFen »

sandworm101 wrote: post #75
r00fus wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Quantico considered a civilian area? Can I visit?

It's just a town, like Roswell, but instead of EBEs and UFOs it has g-men and drones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantico,_Virginia "There are no significant highways passing through Quantico. All road vehicles must pass through MCB Quantico in order to reach the town. Therefore, all vehicle drivers must present a valid driver’s license to the military security officer stationed at the gate, and may be required to…

> all vehicle drivers must present a valid driver’s license to the military security officer stationed at the gate, and may be required to state their destination and reason for visiting.

So, not just a town, then.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#78

Post by anigbrowl »

mindcrime wrote: post #72

Here's what I find interesting, and maybe slightly disturbing: there was a time when if you took a highly techie focused site like this, and posted an article on this topic, a significant portion of the responses would include variations of: "how do we hack these things to disable them?" or "How can we avoid being spotted on camera", or "How about we get together and start physically destroying these things" or "Let'…

These days? All we get is pedantic quibbling over what counts as "surveilled"

Or how good of an investment the surveillance tech companies are. Posts or comments about surveillance countermeasures are significantly more likely to be flagged.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#79

Post by anigbrowl »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #34
olivermarks wrote: post #27

'Surveilled' by who is the bigger question, and what public access and rights do we have around the data produced, and is it being fed to some sort of Stasi style panopticon? It's remarkable to me the lack of public surveillance video produced after major events - the Epstein NY 'suicide' is the latest example, the 2017 UK London Bridge event another. (The latter had video from a mile away filmed with 90's technology…

There are plenty of surveillance (and other) videos of the London Bridge attack. The question is rather why would they publicise videos of people being stabbed to death or run over in HD gory details?

Because people want to know what happened and how. Otherwise liberty, accountability, and self-determination go out the window.

Re: Six U.S. Cities Make the List of Most Surveilled Places in the World

#80

Post by anigbrowl »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #69
olivermarks wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who is 'they'? There are vey few surveillance videos of that incident publicly available. I was thinking of this one when I wrote the above https://youtu.be/BR1s7az-f-k

> There are vey few surveillance videos of that incident publicly available. Indeed. That's what I wrote. I think it's a good thing.

Why would you want to be less informed? Such information shouldn't be sensationalized or exploited for profit, but nor should it be suppressed. If you choose to kept in the dark - which is not the same thing as choosing not to look - then you are inviting deception and exploitation.
Post reply on HN