4 ms·

>Would you love that camera if it was pointed at you? I'm pretty sure humanity is already past the point where this question is timely. We have many cameras wa

by konart 9y ago

>Would you love that camera if it was pointed at you? I'm pretty sure humanity is already past the point where this question is timely. We have many cameras watching us all day long and ten years from now there will be even more. For what it's worth, maybe this will finally teach people to thing before they act.

throwaway2048 9y ago
This is a common tactic in normalizing stuff people are uncomfortable with "its already been that way for X years why are you complaining now". Besides the fact this statement is inaccurate (there are not infact security cameras everywhere, footage is not centralized and analyized by huge powerful parties), It in no way somehow justifies the situation as it stands, or will stand if these become popular.
- konart 9y ago
  >there are not infact security cameras everywhere, footage is not centralized and analyized by huge powerful parties http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-china-42248056/in-your-face-china-s-all-seeing-state http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-china-42248056/in-your... You just wait. >there are not infact security cameras everywhere Well, depending on where you live of course. You won't find a single one in Somali most likely. Anyway, as I've already said - I'm not trying to justify anything.
maltalex 9y ago
> I'm pretty sure humanity is already past the point where this question is timely. We have many cameras watching us all day long and ten years from now there will be even more. Really? Do you have cameras looking at you all day at work? Or at home, while interacting with your family? I hope not. I also hope that you'd object to any attempts to put such a device. It's true that society by and large accepts CCTV cameras in public places. But that's not the same as equipping everyone with an always-on camera and having every human interaction recorded. That's just dystopian. > For what it's worth, maybe this will finally teach people to thing before they act. That's the oldest argument in the book. And sure, it's true. If you point a camera at people, they will behave "better". But that's insane, that's like saying that since children are most likely to be abused at home, then we should outlaw parenting, and have the state raise all kids using only state-certified™ personnel. Sure, that might work, but it kinda seems like we're losing something important along the way, no? Having everyone "act better" is a good cause. But surveillance comes at a huge social cost, not to mention the potential for abuse by the watchers or those who decide what "better" is. Your "act better" might be a long way off the government's idea of how it would like citizens to behave.
- com2kid 9y ago
  > Do you have cameras looking at you all day at work? Anyone who works in an office complex does. Anyone who works in a retail store does. Bus drivers have cameras recording the entire time the bus engine is on. Aside from a farmer in a field, I'm hard pressed to think of a job that doesn't take place under a security camera. Taxi Driver, delivery agents, street food vendors, and people who work at home remotely.
  - vkou 9y ago
    > Anyone who works in an office complex does. My office is full of cameras. None of them are pointed at my workspace. It's the difference between having the street full of cameras, and having them pointed at my living room window.
  - khedoros1 9y ago
    > Anyone who works in an office complex does. Maybe change that to "many people"; "anyone" isn't accurate. For example, at my workplace, there are security cameras at a couple of the doors, but none in the office itself. I don't think I'd stay long if there were a bunch of cameras here.
    - com2kid 9y ago
      > Maybe change that to "many people"; "anyone" isn't accurate. For example, at my workplace, there are security cameras at a couple of the doors, but none in the office itself. I don't think I'd stay long if there were a bunch of cameras here. All the big tech cos I've seen have cameras everywhere. The cameras aren't typically for the employees, they are to keep visitors from walking off with valuables. I've heard of my coworkers having entire computers swiped, and smaller items like phones were also at risk. An old office manager had someone go through a pallet of desktops and haul more than one of them off. With many millions of dollars of hardware just sitting around, not to mention the IP contained on the machines, security cameras are a rather good idea. These buildings are of course locked, but lots of vendors pass through, and determined people can tailgate past checkpoints.
starsinspace 9y ago
> maybe this will finally teach people to thing before they act. I think it'll rather lead to a homogenization of behavior. A dystopia I don't want to live in.
dwighttk 9y ago
some people don't have "many cameras watching" us all day.

by konart 9y ago

throwaway2048 9y ago

This is a common tactic in normalizing stuff people are uncomfortable with "its already been that way for X years why are you complaining now". Besides the fact this statement is inaccurate (there are not infact security cameras everywhere, footage is not centralized and analyized by huge powerful parties), It in no way somehow justifies the situation as it stands, or will stand if these become popular.

konart 9y ago
>there are not infact security cameras everywhere, footage is not centralized and analyized by huge powerful parties http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-china-42248056/in-your-face-china-s-all-seeing-state http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-china-42248056/in-your... You just wait. >there are not infact security cameras everywhere Well, depending on where you live of course. You won't find a single one in Somali most likely. Anyway, as I've already said - I'm not trying to justify anything.

maltalex 9y ago

> I'm pretty sure humanity is already past the point where this question is timely. We have many cameras watching us all day long and ten years from now there will be even more. Really? Do you have cameras looking at you all day at work? Or at home, while interacting with your family? I hope not. I also hope that you'd object to any attempts to put such a device. It's true that society by and large accepts CCTV cameras in public places. But that's not the same as equipping everyone with an always-on camera and having every human interaction recorded. That's just dystopian. > For what it's worth, maybe this will finally teach people to thing before they act. That's the oldest argument in the book. And sure, it's true. If you point a camera at people, they will behave "better". But that's insane, that's like saying that since children are most likely to be abused at home, then we should outlaw parenting, and have the state raise all kids using only state-certified™ personnel. Sure, that might work, but it kinda seems like we're losing something important along the way, no? Having everyone "act better" is a good cause. But surveillance comes at a huge social cost, not to mention the potential for abuse by the watchers or those who decide what "better" is. Your "act better" might be a long way off the government's idea of how it would like citizens to behave.

com2kid 9y ago
> Do you have cameras looking at you all day at work? Anyone who works in an office complex does. Anyone who works in a retail store does. Bus drivers have cameras recording the entire time the bus engine is on. Aside from a farmer in a field, I'm hard pressed to think of a job that doesn't take place under a security camera. Taxi Driver, delivery agents, street food vendors, and people who work at home remotely.
- vkou 9y ago
  > Anyone who works in an office complex does. My office is full of cameras. None of them are pointed at my workspace. It's the difference between having the street full of cameras, and having them pointed at my living room window.
- khedoros1 9y ago
  > Anyone who works in an office complex does. Maybe change that to "many people"; "anyone" isn't accurate. For example, at my workplace, there are security cameras at a couple of the doors, but none in the office itself. I don't think I'd stay long if there were a bunch of cameras here.
  - com2kid 9y ago
    > Maybe change that to "many people"; "anyone" isn't accurate. For example, at my workplace, there are security cameras at a couple of the doors, but none in the office itself. I don't think I'd stay long if there were a bunch of cameras here. All the big tech cos I've seen have cameras everywhere. The cameras aren't typically for the employees, they are to keep visitors from walking off with valuables. I've heard of my coworkers having entire computers swiped, and smaller items like phones were also at risk. An old office manager had someone go through a pallet of desktops and haul more than one of them off. With many millions of dollars of hardware just sitting around, not to mention the IP contained on the machines, security cameras are a rather good idea. These buildings are of course locked, but lots of vendors pass through, and determined people can tailgate past checkpoints.

starsinspace 9y ago

> maybe this will finally teach people to thing before they act. I think it'll rather lead to a homogenization of behavior. A dystopia I don't want to live in.

dwighttk 9y ago

some people don't have "many cameras watching" us all day.