Big brother is watching.

[HotShot 0]

I think cameras should be around, it deturs the pikeys from stealing anything, or mugging anyone. What i'm pissed about is that in some shops now they make you take off hoodies, but its all the Pikeys (or in Dom Jolys words: "Council estate scum!") that nick the stuff, but they dont wear hoodies, they wear all that addidas crap

[reedkiller 0]

The problem with cameras In public places is that they target EVERYONE not just the people who commit crime.

When a government has the ability to monitor its people and arrest those it does not agree with (at the moment people who break the law) it becomes dangerously hard to initiate a rebellion should the government become corrupt. The people should ALWAYS be able to have power over the government. If they do not then corruption sets, given time and the right conditions. Democracy is usually a good way of stopping a government having too much power, but in most democratic countries the governments are slowly passing laws or setting presidents to get more power. The best protection against such corruption is to question whether things like cameras In public places are for the benefit of the people or a tool to keep people under control or give the goverment more power.

Everyone should study all of George Orwell's major works.

[Balschoiw 0]

And who guarantees that the material captured by cameras isn´t abused for commercial purposes like customer habits etc ?

In this context I should mention that the brits use a software program to recognize faces on cameras. Who guarantees that abuse is impossible ?

[Die Alive 0]

I want more cops and less cameras.

The last thing I want then I'm getting the shit kicked out of me is a camera filming the whole thing to be shown on TV the next day. How embarrassing.

And here, maybe 7 years ago, in the subway system, they added like 400 new cameras all over the place, and reduced the number of patrolling transit cops, a study 2 years latter, showed that the number of crimes (muggings, fights, spray painting/vandalism) went up 40%. And the number of arrests for these crimes went down too. Cameras don't arrest criminals, transit cops do, so we had fewer transit cops looking for more and more criminals, didn’t work out very well.

For example, if I spray paint a large FUCK COUNTER STRIKE OFP RULEZ!!!!1 on the subway platform, in full view of the cameras, the very next day, they'll put a cop in front of my tag. I might be able to walk by the cop, maybe ask him what "counter strike" is, and he may or may not know that I'm the one who tagged the wall, since he may or may not have viewed the video of me doing the deed. The cop stands there for a day, and the day after he's gone. So I spray FUCK BF1942 OFP RULEZ!!!!1 and the next day, 2 cops are standing on the subway platform. Now they're looking for someone who matches my description. So I'll just tag somewhere they're not standing at.

And now, with all these nice documented crimes being videotaped, the cops are more and more profiling (even racial profiling) certain youths, as a way of deterring crimes, since they got the video evidence that most crimes are done by black youths in baggy pants and baseball caps, and not white prep boys in lavender shirts. So cops are treating all minorities as potential criminals, even though only a small portion of them are.

So yes, cameras can catch the criminals in the act, but you still need the foot soldiers out there beating them down, I mean, arresting them

-=Die Alive=-

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

Quote[/b] ]cameras can catch the criminals in the act, but you still need the foot soldiers out there beating them down, I mean, arresting them

Not really, Just take one of those smart dogs (could work with monkeys too but they are too slow) and show them the video tape and they'll take care of it!

Welcome to the future of crime solutions

[miles teg 1]

Quote[/b] ]cameras can catch the criminals in the act, but you still need the foot soldiers out there beating them down, I mean, arresting them

Not really, Just take one of those smart dogs (could work with monkeys too but they are too slow) and show them the video tape and they'll take care of it!

Welcome to the future of crime solutions

... Or donkeys! Donkeys are smart too and they can be viscious. Just imagine... crime fighting donkeys!

Nah seriously, to me it's a moot issue. Here in the US everyone's paranoid about the government watching them, but in reality there are private security cameras everywhere that are very often used in criminal investigations in local, state, and federal cases. There are also cameras on buses in many city's public transportation systems. I personally don't see how it can be abused unless you're accused of something cuz you look like a guy on the film. But that happens all the time with eye witnesses point out the wrong person in a police line-up.

Other then that, the government already has loads of info on you from your driver's license, tax documents, and other forms of information that government has on us.

The government can screw whoever it wants and they do that in many cases. A case in point is that stupid No Fly list. There have been reports of anti-war protesters who were on that list and have been forced off planes are just harrassed alot at the airports.

Ain't crap they can do about it. It's just the US government's way of saying, "Don't screw with Big Brother or we'll screw you."

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Guest]

And who guarantees that the material captured by cameras isn´t abused for commercial purposes like customer habits etc ?

There was a case in Stockholm where a night club sold pictures to a tabloid of a fight where some celebreties were involved. Don't remember how the case ended though.

Quote[/b] ]In this context I should mention that the brits use a software program to recognize faces on cameras. Who guarantees that abuse is impossible ?

Funny you should mention it. My current work is with adaptive systems such as neural nets that have a direct application in face recognition etc. More cameras = more work for me

Anyhow, I'm still opposed to camera surveillance, as I feel that it is an invasion of privacy. I also think that the broader implications are serious. While the current government may be nice and democratic, who can guarantee what will be in 100 years. If we set up the infrastructure for total surveillance of the citizens, this could be used in a very bad way if not so democratic people came to power. Imagine how a dictatorsip could flourish if it could track every citizen. Any form of opposition would be entirely impossible.

[sanctuary 19]

Anyhow, I'm still opposed to camera surveillance, as I feel that it is an invasion of privacy. I also think that the broader implications are serious.

As camera are placed in public places (street , shops , markets etc) , you cant take the privacy argument because there is no privacy in public places.

If there were cameras in your home , you could be against cameras because of privacy violation, but in public places it is a little nonsense

Now for the possible deviation it is always a possibility yes.

But there is a possibility that a meteor crush you as soon as you leave your home too or a greater possibility that a car hit you when you cross a street despite all your precautions.

That are possibilities , but not always happen but they exist and until now, they didnt stop you from going out , the same with cameras usage .

And before the discussion continue , i suggest every people here to look at this object carefully

[Balschoiw 0]

I don´t really believe in the truth pictures tell us  

See what I mean ? I never had that "For sale" sign with me  

[Renagade 0]

The problem with cameras In public places is that they target EVERYONE not just the people who commit crime.

When a government has the ability to monitor its people and arrest those it does not agree with (at the moment people who break the law) it  becomes dangerously hard to initiate a rebellion should the government become corrupt. The people should ALWAYS be able to have power over the government. If they do not then corruption sets, given time and the right conditions. Democracy is usually a good way of stopping a government having too much power, but in most democratic countries the governments are slowly passing laws or setting presidents to get more power. The best protection against such corruption is to question whether things like cameras In public places are for the benefit of the people or a tool to keep people under control or give the goverment more power.

Everyone should study all of George Orwell's major works.

funnily old adolf said something smilar at one time

Quote[/b] ]So yes, cameras can catch the criminals in the act, but you still need the foot soldiers out there beating them down, I mean, arresting them

I guess depending on their mood they might beat u for fun too

Im not sure if some of our trains have cctv on them>Thres sometimes stickers inside them ssaying hidden cctv also in all the train stations they either have the bulky cameras or little ones hidden in a black or reflective dome more or less the same size and design as the ones in tribes 2.

Theres also loads of s peed cameras over here and there was an odd group that went around smashing ones that were deemed to be there only to bing in cash for the cops.

[FSPilot 0]

I still don't see what the problem is.  To quote nationstates: "When you're in public, PEOPLE CAN SEE YOU".

there's nothing wrong with traffic cameras, cameras on sidewalks, cameras in stores.  anywhere that is a public area.

if stores were going to use cameras to analyse their customers they'd simply use their security cameras. i also dont see a problem with people selling video tapes to people. yeah, some of it could get kinda perverted. but again you're in public. if you dont want people gawking at your torpedos you need to put on more than a kleenex for a t-shirt.

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

Whos this guy?

[reedkiller 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Quote (reedkiller @ June 19 2003,15:11)

The problem with cameras In public places is that they target EVERYONE not just the people who commit crime.

When a government has the ability to monitor its people and arrest those it does not agree with (at the moment people who break the law) it  becomes dangerously hard to initiate a rebellion should the government become corrupt. The people should ALWAYS be able to have power over the government. If they do not then corruption sets, given time and the right conditions. Democracy is usually a good way of stopping a government having too much power, but in most democratic countries the governments are slowly passing laws or setting presidents to get more power. The best protection against such corruption is to question whether things like cameras In public places are for the benefit of the people or a tool to keep people under control or give the goverment more power.

Everyone should study all of George Orwell's major works.

funnily old adolf said something  smilar at  one time  

thats funny because the old communists Lenin and George Orwell said something VERY smilar!

[Tovarish 0]

thats funny because the old communists Lenin and George Orwell said something VERY smilar!

WTF!?! Orwell was a communist?        . Man, that's like saying Hitler wrote Mein Kampf because he was Jewish.

[bn880 5]

Whos this guy?

Haha, what do you mean who it is? You mean you don't recognize people you talk to.

[Guest]

I still don't see what the problem is.  To quote nationstates: "When you're in public, PEOPLE CAN SEE YOU".

there's nothing wrong with traffic cameras, cameras on sidewalks, cameras in stores.  anywhere that is a public area.

The problem is in recording and in computerized face recognition. With out any effort, the government (or somebody that breaks into the system, bribes a government official etc) could keep an exact record of your whearabouts, activities and who you talk to.

[Tovarish 0]

Funny you should mention it. My current work is with adaptive systems such as neural nets that have a direct application in face recognition etc. More cameras = more work for me

Great, denoir's playing a part in moderating our lives too :P

[-WKK--SkyQuake 0]

Whats the big deal?

Since i recived a mug-shot of me and a fine for speeding 83 km/h (in a 70-zone, next to a school i attend) I seldom leave home. I was speeding because i was getting late for class

When I leave home I wear mask and 2 times a month I change hair color. I try to speak with a different accent when i meet new people (german or the standard "no, hablo danish").

When i drive home from school ( i only drive in reverse now, no chance of speeding) i leave in the opposite direction of my home to make sure im not beeing followed(driving backwards also makes it easier to keep both eyes on the potentiel followers) . It takes a little extra time, but im sure, ive lost some echelon-guys a couple of times.

Other than that, here is some good advice.

If you see a big mobile van parked somewhere close to a road and a big white flash blinks when u drive past it, your marked for termination!!!

SkyQuake - soon to change name because all of this is beeing logged!

[Nagual 0]

We have video cameras installed on some trains here in Australia, and to be honest I think it's a good idea.

Heh, last i heard most of those cameras are dummies, they may feed to a screen, but the train companies can't afford to record from them. It might be different with privatisation. They are deterents at least.

The cameras in the city though, like King street, they are proper cameras, while its definatley good for curbing / solving crime at night, i dont like the idea of being filmed while walking down the street during the day, or while at traffic lights in a vehice.

Theres nothing really to worry about though unless people have something to hide, and even then private investigators are more likely to be the ones stomping over people privacy, considering "big brother" would hardly care about most peoples doings and indiscretions. Cameras for security are a great invention, but cameras for public surveillance are questionable without a defined and limited purpose (imo).

[FSPilot 0]

(Denoir)

The problem is in recording and in computerized face recognition. With out any effort, the government (or somebody that breaks into the system, bribes a government official etc) could keep an exact record of your whearabouts, activities and who you talk to.

Yes, but they can do that with an undercover police officer now anyway.

[Tovarish 0]

(Denoir)

The problem is in recording and in computerized face recognition. With out any effort, the government (or somebody that breaks into the system, bribes a government official etc) could keep an exact record of your whearabouts, activities and who you talk to.

Yes, but they can do that with an undercover police officer now anyway.

One of the key phrases is "without effort". Undercover officers require effort, and you can't have an undercover officer watching each and every individual 24/7. The sort of technology denoir was talking about, potentially can. Also, in the case of a police officer - who's watching them? If there is no record of it (ie videotape) can you always trust in the police 100%? (you as in government) - see, the problem is, with this sort of technology in the hands of the right - or should I say wrong government, dissent would be effectively impossible. Any potential troublemakers would be identified and if needed dealt with long before they could organize and form  a significant oposition movement. In short, we'd all be powerless sheep.

*edit* not to mention that there usually needs to be a documented reason for a police officer to be watching someone. The camera....well, it's always there.

[FSPilot 0]

Are we talking about putting cameras in public hotbeds for crime or are we talking about putting cameras in people's houses.

[Tovarish 0]

Cameras in all public places basically

[FSPilot 0]

If we only put them in public places how can they watch you 24/7?

Anyway, I don't even see what the problem is with the police being able to keep tabs on people. As long as they're in public, and as long as the law's they're enforcing are constitutional.

[Tovarish 0]

If we only put them in public places how can they watch you 24/7?

Oh I'm sorry, So they can't watch me for the 6-7 hours a day where I'm actually at home - usually the time I get to sleep

Quote[/b] ]Anyway, I don't even see what the problem is with the police being able to keep tabs on people. As long as they're in public, and as long as the law's they're enforcing are constitutional.

With face recognition software and cameras, keeping track of people is as easy as telling a computer "find so-and-so". Any time you leave your home you can be watched. That my friend, is absolute power. Absolute power does what absolutely? Imagine the potential for blackmail of high level government officials by anyone with acces to such a system. Imagine the potential for any government to abuse it's power and decide that it knows what's better for it's citizens wether they like it or not - like I said, any sort of organized oposition would be impossible.

Pick up this book:

Read it and then see if the proposition of always been watched by the powers-that-be dosen't give you the willies. Funny that Orwell envisioned this sort of thing to be a danger inherent to communism, not our sort of free society. We've even got the Newspeak thing going on. Just this monday I got a warning at work for "Time Theft" (You and I would call it "slacking off"). I had to resist the urge to apologize for having being "Double-plus ungood".