4 ms·

Controversial and likely to be downvoted but what's the problem here? Surely it's good that a law breaker has been caught? If you're in China, you play by their

Controversial and likely to be downvoted but what's the problem here? Surely it's good that a law breaker has been caught? If you're in China, you play by their rules, no?

onion2k 9y ago
what's the problem here? This sort of automated policing forces people to live in fear. Having to live by the letter of the law makes society paranoid, and that's distinctly unhealthy. It makes it very easy for a corrupt government to extend their control over the people too. And lastly, everyone breaks the law in minor ways. You might speed in your car by a couple of mph, or jaywalk once in the wrong place, or drop some litter in a controlled area. Just imagine living in the knowledge that a mistake like that will be caught, and you will be arrested for it (and maybe lose your job and livelihood because of that). This is definitely a bad thing.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  It's not the "will" be arrested that matters. It's that you "can" be arrested is held over people's heads to prevent them from voicing dissent or standing up to the government.
- amaccuish 9y ago
  I mean, I live in fear now that going slightly over the speed limit I'll be caught. You never know if the police are nearby, so in public you live by the letter of the law. I don't understand how this changes that is all :)
  - fwn 9y ago
    Are you saying that you can not realize the idea that a full enforcement capacity of the law will change people's relationship to law enforcement or do you implicitly say that tsuch potential change is nothing to worry about? Honest question as the first is just a capacity problem and the second (I guess) a moral argument.
- gormz 9y ago
  Yeah that's not how I see this issue at all. I see it more as a terrible tool for an oppressive regime to use, but for most it's probably fine. Unless they went crazy and started mailing people tickets, like they do with red light cameras, I don't think it will be bad. Many of those cameras get fought anyway under our right to face your accuser if taken to court.
golemotron 9y ago
"Bentham described the Panopticon as "a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example". Elsewhere, in a letter, he described the Panopticon prison as "a mill for grinding rogues honest"." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon
sundvor 9y ago
"If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear."
- oh-kumudo 9y ago
  The person indeed had done something wrong, technology just helped here to catch him more quickly
  - noxToken 9y ago
    So everyone else is force into being surveilled as well? In the US military, there are health and comfort inspections. They have a legitimate use: inspect the living quarters on base to ensure that personnel are living in safe, habitable conditions. That's not what they're used for. Word had passed that there was a small Rx drug ring in the barracks. Why search only the accused rooms when you can search the entirety of the barracks all at once. I didn't have any contraband in my room. I don't think I ever had any contraband. Did that matter? Nope. Sometime between 5 and 6 AM, we were all made to unlock all of our drawers and cabinets, exit our rooms immediately, and wait. If you didn't unlock something, they'd cut the locks with bolt cutters. You'd return to a room that was absolutely ransacked. Seriously - it looked like a thief was quickly sprinting from room to room tossing everything in sight while hoping to find a hidden stash of jewels. Sounds a bit far-fetched for the general public right? Hardly! This is the same thing as a summary no-knock warrant.
  - chillingeffect 9y ago
    That's the trick: to sway your attention to the good without considering the bad. The bad here is scope creep of the surveillance network, particularly in a totalitarian regime. But once you've acquiesced to the "good" parts of it, you will rationalize the bad parts unless you think critically.
    - sundvor 9y ago
      Exactly. Thanks for finishing the unspoken part of my (Integral, Pet Shop Boys) quote.
jasonkostempski 9y ago
"If you're in China, you play by their rules, no?" No. No one goes a day without breaking, at least, a minor law, especially in places where many laws are straight up crazy. Perfect surveillance, the power to make up laws, and the power to enforce them is too much for any one entity to have.
- 794CD01 9y ago
  Then maybe get rid of some of the crazy laws? Just a thought.
  - jasonkostempski 9y ago
    That would be great, but what actors in the system have the power to do that AND want it done?
etatoby 9y ago
First they used it on those that had committed crimes, and nobody spoke up. Then they used it on (etc.) and nobody spoke up. When finally they used it on me, there was noone left to speak up.
CWuestefeld 9y ago
I think there's something to be said for the ability to realize you (as a criminal) have made a mistake, and decide to just leave everything and start over. So long as you're laying low enough to not draw any attention, it seems like in many cases this would be a better thing than the cost of the criminal justice system and incarceration, plus the way incarceration seems to ruin any life that had any value beforehand. This isn't to say that this option should be encouraged, or even allowed to work a lot of the time. But the fact that there's some flexibility there, keeping the system from complete bureaucratic ossification, has some value to society.
CalRobert 9y ago
Some people were born in China, and haven't had a chance to opt in to the rules. Sometimes the rules are not just. Perhaps you like Falun Gong. Perhaps you're a member of a disliked race/religion/hair color/etc. In addition to making it much harder to avoid getting caught without going full Ann Frank, this makes it much harder for individuals who recognize that the law is unjust and are in a position to let it slide actually let it slide. After all, the cameras will get you eventually.
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
The problem is not that they caught a criminal (assuming they actually were a criminal by sensible standards). The problem is the concentration of power this implies, and the abuse potential that comes with that power. One of the greatest dangers to human flourishing historically has been concentration of power.

Controversial and likely to be downvoted but what's the problem here? Surely it's good that a law breaker has been caught? If you're in China, you play by their rules, no?

onion2k 9y ago

what's the problem here? This sort of automated policing forces people to live in fear. Having to live by the letter of the law makes society paranoid, and that's distinctly unhealthy. It makes it very easy for a corrupt government to extend their control over the people too. And lastly, everyone breaks the law in minor ways. You might speed in your car by a couple of mph, or jaywalk once in the wrong place, or drop some litter in a controlled area. Just imagine living in the knowledge that a mistake like that will be caught, and you will be arrested for it (and maybe lose your job and livelihood because of that). This is definitely a bad thing.

dsfyu404ed 9y ago
It's not the "will" be arrested that matters. It's that you "can" be arrested is held over people's heads to prevent them from voicing dissent or standing up to the government.
amaccuish 9y ago
I mean, I live in fear now that going slightly over the speed limit I'll be caught. You never know if the police are nearby, so in public you live by the letter of the law. I don't understand how this changes that is all :)
- fwn 9y ago
  Are you saying that you can not realize the idea that a full enforcement capacity of the law will change people's relationship to law enforcement or do you implicitly say that tsuch potential change is nothing to worry about? Honest question as the first is just a capacity problem and the second (I guess) a moral argument.
gormz 9y ago
Yeah that's not how I see this issue at all. I see it more as a terrible tool for an oppressive regime to use, but for most it's probably fine. Unless they went crazy and started mailing people tickets, like they do with red light cameras, I don't think it will be bad. Many of those cameras get fought anyway under our right to face your accuser if taken to court.

golemotron 9y ago

"Bentham described the Panopticon as "a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example". Elsewhere, in a letter, he described the Panopticon prison as "a mill for grinding rogues honest"." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

sundvor 9y ago

"If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear."

oh-kumudo 9y ago
The person indeed had done something wrong, technology just helped here to catch him more quickly
- noxToken 9y ago
  So everyone else is force into being surveilled as well? In the US military, there are health and comfort inspections. They have a legitimate use: inspect the living quarters on base to ensure that personnel are living in safe, habitable conditions. That's not what they're used for. Word had passed that there was a small Rx drug ring in the barracks. Why search only the accused rooms when you can search the entirety of the barracks all at once. I didn't have any contraband in my room. I don't think I ever had any contraband. Did that matter? Nope. Sometime between 5 and 6 AM, we were all made to unlock all of our drawers and cabinets, exit our rooms immediately, and wait. If you didn't unlock something, they'd cut the locks with bolt cutters. You'd return to a room that was absolutely ransacked. Seriously - it looked like a thief was quickly sprinting from room to room tossing everything in sight while hoping to find a hidden stash of jewels. Sounds a bit far-fetched for the general public right? Hardly! This is the same thing as a summary no-knock warrant.
- chillingeffect 9y ago
  That's the trick: to sway your attention to the good without considering the bad. The bad here is scope creep of the surveillance network, particularly in a totalitarian regime. But once you've acquiesced to the "good" parts of it, you will rationalize the bad parts unless you think critically.
  - sundvor 9y ago
    Exactly. Thanks for finishing the unspoken part of my (Integral, Pet Shop Boys) quote.

jasonkostempski 9y ago

"If you're in China, you play by their rules, no?" No. No one goes a day without breaking, at least, a minor law, especially in places where many laws are straight up crazy. Perfect surveillance, the power to make up laws, and the power to enforce them is too much for any one entity to have.

794CD01 9y ago
Then maybe get rid of some of the crazy laws? Just a thought.
- jasonkostempski 9y ago
  That would be great, but what actors in the system have the power to do that AND want it done?

etatoby 9y ago

First they used it on those that had committed crimes, and nobody spoke up. Then they used it on (etc.) and nobody spoke up. When finally they used it on me, there was noone left to speak up.

CWuestefeld 9y ago

I think there's something to be said for the ability to realize you (as a criminal) have made a mistake, and decide to just leave everything and start over. So long as you're laying low enough to not draw any attention, it seems like in many cases this would be a better thing than the cost of the criminal justice system and incarceration, plus the way incarceration seems to ruin any life that had any value beforehand. This isn't to say that this option should be encouraged, or even allowed to work a lot of the time. But the fact that there's some flexibility there, keeping the system from complete bureaucratic ossification, has some value to society.

CalRobert 9y ago

Some people were born in China, and haven't had a chance to opt in to the rules. Sometimes the rules are not just. Perhaps you like Falun Gong. Perhaps you're a member of a disliked race/religion/hair color/etc. In addition to making it much harder to avoid getting caught without going full Ann Frank, this makes it much harder for individuals who recognize that the law is unjust and are in a position to let it slide actually let it slide. After all, the cameras will get you eventually.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago

The problem is not that they caught a criminal (assuming they actually were a criminal by sensible standards). The problem is the concentration of power this implies, and the abuse potential that comes with that power. One of the greatest dangers to human flourishing historically has been concentration of power.