11–20 of 41 posts
(Preferably get it from your local library, if you still have one, or a small independent bookseller.)
>> Images from the cameras are in turn fed to computer programs that allow analysts to track suspects, and even to rewind to look back over their paths, like watching TiVo.
I'm pretty sure that really just means that they digitized footage and the analysts did the actual tracking manually but it reads as having good image recognition back in 2006.
> The advent of this technology, combined with artificial intelligence and vast data banks, makes almost nonsensical the ideas of privacy and probable cause of an earlier age. That's like saying that the invention of atomic weapons made almost nonsensical the idea of not being vaporized. The fact that I could be vaporized more easily now that at any time in history has nothing to do with my hardline anti-vaporization…
The reason why we haven't seen use of atomic weapons is that it's clear that use of atomic weapons will be met with more atomic weapons. It's not clear that the state is worried about retaliation against wide area surveillance.
So this surveillance technology started in the military to track insurgents, expanded to law enforcement and government to track suspects and the general public, and is now expanding to corporations to monitor customers. This pattern makes it seem like the cat is out of the bag, and that pervasive expansion and abuse of this technology is all but inevitable. Let's extrapolate a bit and start thinking about what socie…
First thought... canopies, entire communities with public spaces covered with walkways, pools, parks, all under tent-like construction. Garages fully connected to houses, parking garages with interior building access preferred. Do we have disruptive tech for larger public areas like parks, beaches, etc? Vapor or EM or even air curtain-like heat shimmer generators, anything that obscures line of sight... Or maybe the…
It won't matter because of all the cameras under the canvas. Cell phones will continue to track every person's location in real time. You can try to hide from the satellites and drones, but you can bet that your every movement will still be tracked somehow.
So this surveillance technology started in the military to track insurgents, expanded to law enforcement and government to track suspects and the general public, and is now expanding to corporations to monitor customers. This pattern makes it seem like the cat is out of the bag, and that pervasive expansion and abuse of this technology is all but inevitable. Let's extrapolate a bit and start thinking about what socie…
"For the masses, the feeling that technology develops along an inevitable path reflects their lack of agency — the fact that the crucial decisions about the technological conditions of society will be made by a largely self-regulating confraternity of elites. For engineers and scientists, technological development appears to be driven by a combination of what they can imagine, what is technically feasible, and what governments or markets demand. Even those whose particular genius produces the breakthroughs feel this as an inevitability, as if they are possessed by some inner logic that is the real force ushering in this new world."
Everyone loves a good under-dog story!
Seems parts are a bit misleading and exaggerating capabilities. E.g. >> Images from the cameras are in turn fed to computer programs that allow analysts to track suspects, and even to rewind to look back over their paths, like watching TiVo. I'm pretty sure that really just means that they digitized footage and the analysts did the actual tracking manually but it reads as having good image recognition back in 2006.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First thought... canopies, entire communities with public spaces covered with walkways, pools, parks, all under tent-like construction. Garages fully connected to houses, parking garages with interior building access preferred. Do we have disruptive tech for larger public areas like parks, beaches, etc? Vapor or EM or even air curtain-like heat shimmer generators, anything that obscures line of sight... Or maybe the…
> First thought... canopies, entire communities with public spaces covered with walkways, pools, parks, all under tent-like construction. It won't matter because of all the cameras under the canvas. Cell phones will continue to track every person's location in real time. You can try to hide from the satellites and drones, but you can bet that your every movement will still be tracked somehow.
Even so, here in my office, there are no cameras. And only heavily draped windows. And no audio, for anything that's private.
And so it's only my online activity that can be at all private. What a strange world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason why we haven't seen use of atomic weapons is that it's clear that use of atomic weapons will be met with more atomic weapons. It's not clear that the state is worried about retaliation against wide area surveillance.
I don't think it was ever clear that atomic weapons wouldn't be used, especially not near the time of their invention. Remember the Cold War?
Stated another way: if we use them we know they will be used on us, so we'd better not use them.
OP's point was the there is no similar guaranteed retaliation that might motivate restraint in the use of surveillance.
For some perspective on this level of surveillance (and what it's like when the technology extends to the consumer level) check out this 21 year old book by David Brin, "The Transparent Society: Will Technology Force Us to Choose Between Privacy and Freedom". (Preferably get it from your local library, if you still have one, or a small independent bookseller.)