Who Is Watching You?

Discussion in 'privacy problems' started by ronjor, Dec 30, 2014.

  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,727
    Location:
    Texas
  2. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    687
    Only read about 2/3rds through. Will read the rest later. Thanks for posting. EVERYONE should read this.
     
  3. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    We're living that dystopian future we were always warned about. :sick:
     
  4. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,828
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I see one potential upside to all the surveillance cameras everywhere, and all the digital tracking.
    It has become easier to prove your whereabouts if an alibi is needed. Police think you are good for a crime in one location, but you're on camera in a convenience store 300 miles away using your credit card to make a purchase.
     
  5. Tarnak

    Tarnak Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Posts:
    3,873
    I don't know whether I am a person of interest to any authority, but I do watch that US TV show 'Person Of Interest'. The future is coming, and we won't know what has hit us until it arrives.
     
  6. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,055
    It was a long read but worth reading.
    Maybe things will change when more and more people will realize this.
     
  7. ProTruckDriver

    ProTruckDriver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    768
    Location:
    "Here on Wilders"
    Yes, so true. :(
     
  8. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    That's only if they don't conveniently tamper the evidence as always.
     
  9. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    That was my thought too. I think better yet, the public should have their own cameras to watch the watchers. (Though seriously, I'm not beyond getting one for my car even).

    Pitting camera against camera, humanity will self-censor itself out of its humanity.
     
  10. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    687
    There's no "upside" that is a fair trade for my privacy, but any so-called "good side" is the very thing the PTB count on to condition the masses and push forward their hideous agenda of total control. I don't buy into it for a moment the lame excuses they use, like tailored advertising, and that that is all there is to this. If people can't see where this is heading they need to open their eyes.
     
  11. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,954
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    Good Luck trying to obtain/subpoena that surveillance footage and trying to disprove that you had a friend use your credit card and the clerk didn't ask for a photo id. Good luck at the plea bargain negotiation with the prosecutor. Plead guilty to larceny with a 2 year term with a chance for parole after one year or risk a guilty verdict with a 5-10 year sentence, with no opportunity for parole. Sadly, most prosecutors are evaluated on cases processed, not Justice. :)
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  12. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,954
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    "In the future, will everyone be wearing body cameras?.............

    Just as we got used to cameras on buildings and cameras in everyone’s pockets, now it’s normal that there are cameras on bodies — taking photos every 10 seconds or so, in case the footage becomes useful later.

    This is the future as imagined by people who research wearable cameras, and what it means to record what you do all day everyday......

    body cameras have the power to change the behavior of the people they are filming.
    And most studies of the subject show that they do...........

    'This is not as distant a future as we imagine,' said Albrecht Schmidt, a professor of human interaction at the University of Stuttgart in Germany...'

    Schmidt is a researcher in a European Union-funded project on memory augmentation, or making it easier to remember things accurately...............

    There will, of course, be privacy concerns. But researchers such as Schmidt say that those will be worked out as the technology becomes more useful................."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...4a3-11e4-b9b7-b8632ae73d25_story.html?hpid=z6
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  13. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,147
    Location:
    UK
    I heard about a RL incident where two schoolboys were having a scrap, and in order to keep order, the teacher pointed at a CCTV camera to say that they were being watched and would be judged from the footage.

    A more appalling dystopia I can't imagine, where meaning is swamped by data.
     
  14. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,028
    Judged as in who won the fight? Who had the best style?

    When I was a child, kids were encouraged to beat each other bloody. But no weapons ;)
     
  15. Mayahana

    Mayahana Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    Posts:
    2,220
    Most cameras aren't monitored.

    When I first installed cameras around my home/property I used to monitor them constantly. After a few weeks I installed facial recognition software, and other stuff, and watched them less.. After a couple of months I never watch them, and only review footage if there is a specific reason for it. This is the same with companies. After the initial 'thrill' of cameras fades, they languish in obscurity, only being examined if an incident takes place that needs to be examined. So it's not as bad as people think..

    Our company officers can monitor the NOC all they want, watching us pick our noses. But the fact is it bored them, and they don't even keep the PIP on their desktops anymore.
     
  16. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    I know of a story of a guy who stole a purse from a worker at a charity organization. When the police questioned him, they told him the charity place had cameras and if he didn't fess up it wouldn't matter cause they could just review the footage. So he fessed up. They were no cameras. :argh: That's still a funny story to me. Honestly the same tactics used there are done on a much larger scale, where the lack of being verified if you were indeed monitored, creates and controls a self censoring society. Either corporations, or government- the outcome is all the same.

    edit

    The psychological and behavioral effects it places on people are real though. Because you can never verify if you are being watched, you must assume you always are. I agree though that the reality is that they really don't monitor them unless there's a crime scene after. Same with store security cameras.

    I just wish the public could play the same game though. Cameras and the resulting video and pictures are great tools to expose corruption. The upside of having so many devices available to the public that have embedded cameras.

    edit2

    Of course too, once the automation of facial recognization is bettered, then there won't be a need for actual people to sit through the footage.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2014
  17. ProTruckDriver

    ProTruckDriver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    768
    Location:
    "Here on Wilders"
  18. driekus

    driekus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2014
    Posts:
    489
    My concern with surveillance is that if you go back in time looking for evidence you could probably convict anybody of anything if you really wanted to.

    If I had the purchase history of somebody over the last twelve months I could easily figure a dozen different types of explosives you could make with them. You can twist anything if you really want to.
     
  19. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,147
    Location:
    UK
    This is also part of the problem though - people are not terribly good at assessing false positive rates (and the forensic community has been disgustingly lax in doing so properly, lining their own nests). As we've seen with fingerprint and DNA tests which sometimes have good discrimination, the illusion of good diagnosis has to be taken with a large dose of salt, and a regrettably rare knowledge of Bayesian statistics, particularly when criminalising the population - which is exactly what mass surveillance does.

    As you say, the psychological effects of incessant surveillance are real and well documented (as well as being symptomatic of a nasty imbalance of power between governed and the elite).
     
  20. driekus

    driekus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2014
    Posts:
    489
    Very good point deBoetie and thank you for pointing out the issue with DNA. One can imagine in the future that DNA sampling will be able to detect smaller and smaller amounts of DNA. Technology could have the opposite effects when it comes to DNA and also potentially to facial recognition.
    DNA Signal amplification is not far from the point where they could go and sample an area, requiring a single cell to get an answer. The problem at this point is you could use incorrectly because you could "prove" that anybody committed the crime.

    Facial recognition has some similarities and the potential for bias. If for example a theft at a convenience store was conducted. The store didnt get CCTV but some of the nearby streets did. Facial recognition identifies an individual who had a criminal record for a similar crime. Lazy police go after that person despite a lack of evidence. Imagine if they also sampled the store for DNA and fingerprints and found the individuals DNA and prints. What is the conclusion that a Jury will draw on this situation?

    Great technology but it is very easily abused.
     
  21. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    I think those people are obsessed with bar graphs or something, but don't actual question the validity of what is on the graph to begin with. This was a article I read a few days ago that was basically saying that bad software makes for bad science: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-bad-software-leads-to-bad-science So we can imagine the software used by corporations and governments. Them being so caught up in getting data, they don't question anything else. Just the "legalities" of being caught themselves invading the privacy of others.
     
  22. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,147
    Location:
    UK
    Yes, there's a fertile field for psychology in understanding how magnificent people are at self-justification, reputation management and "economy with the truth". The defence of the immoral and indefensible by the politicians and security services is nauseating. But, as the Stanford prison experiment showed, "normal" people are terribly good at it all, allowing them to take their salary, bonuses, and pensions, sleep nights, and act all patriotic with their friends and family.
     
  23. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    Very apparent logical steps (justifications) can lead to the worst aspects of their behavior. No one questions themselves enough.

    Man it's refreshing to run into someone else that gets it. :thumb:
     
  24. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    318
    Good point about DNA the criminal justice system considers DNA evidence as almost irrefutable proof of guilt and yet I can think of a multitude of ways to get someone else's DNA and plant it at a crime scene. Especially if I committed the crime.