4 ms·
The technology and infrastructure to do surveillance of this scale is already in place/available in the western world (see cameras at every corner in London, Am
by dhruvrrp 8y ago
The technology and infrastructure to do surveillance of this scale is already in place/available in the western world (see cameras at every corner in London, Amazon Rekogition?).
So is this already happening in the west? And what can we do to stop technology like this to be put in place, considering a lot of elected officials don’t seem to consider this as inherently ‘bad’ for society.
- happytoexplain 8y agoMany citizens, as opposed to just politicians, are happy to be surveilled, as long as it's ostensibly being used against people that they feel hatred for. That's a key difference in this case. The West may have an easier time fending this off, until the day some politician decides to frame the surveillance as a safeguard against a broad social group, e.g. a religion, race, or political affiliation, as opposed to the more nebulous category of just "criminals", in which case I'm afraid I don't have much reason to think the West would be any more immune to such societal crumbling than China is.
- votepaunchy 8y agoWhy so we think such abuses will be driven by politicians? These policies come from the Executive, only two of which are elected in America. It’ll be some unelected official driving these policies.
- candiodari 8y agoThe problem is always the same. Information databases are never truly a problem until they're shared. So far the government/police/medical establishment/child services/UN/... are considered exceptions to those roles. If we stop that exception. Fully. We're good. NO information sharing without judicial oversight, in individual cases, with option to defend yourself and a default "no share" attitude. That would kill this.