3 ms·

Thinking of UK football 'hooligan' violence, after lots of surveillance being installed within stadiums, violence enthusiasts organized their confrontations at

Thinking of UK football 'hooligan' violence, after lots of surveillance being installed within stadiums, violence enthusiasts organized their confrontations at areas reconnaissance proved to be unmonitored. Nearby industrial parks etc... If you are involved in a high risk activity you take steps to outwit any surveillance. A relative was recently mugged by Sheperds Bush tube/Westfield London UK in a busy area. She was rescued by an Uber driver but the incident was orchestrated by a hooded individual who knew where the cameras were so there is no footage.

pavel_lishin 7y ago
> Thinking of UK football 'hooligan' violence, after lots of surveillance being installed within stadiums, violence enthusiasts organized their confrontations at areas reconnaissance proved to be unmonitored At the risk of sounding like a heartless libertarian, sounds like in this case, the outcome was a net positive. People who want to and are willing to suffer violence are going to a specialized place to do so, rather than involving a bunch of football fans who just want to see some people play a sport.
- jrumbut 7y ago
  Except for anyone who needs to make a living at the industrial park. There is a difference though between surveillance at a massive event known for both violence and family entertainment and wide area, persistent surveillance. I'm OK with a lot of cameras at stadiums, when they follow you home that's a problem.
  - avanti 7y ago
    I doubt someone will have the time to follow you going home in the camera. When massive surveillance is deployed, there's such an enormous amount of data that police would only have time to review those related to crime.
UnFleshedOne 7y ago
So,.. I guess UK needs more cameras then?
- olivermarks 7y ago
  Unworkable, my point was people with bad intentions circumvent these systems. It's also a mystery why media release of surveillance footage of high importance areas appear to have been shot on mediocre quality old technology when so much is spent on the equipment. https://youtu.be/BR1s7az-f-k https://youtu.be/BR1s7az-f-k
  - UnFleshedOne 7y ago
    I'm in general against mass surveillance (on privacy and potential for abuse grounds), but that a measure is not perfect and can be worked around with some skill and motivation is not a good argument against it on its own. It is possible for an imperfect system to increase minimum level of motivation sufficiently to reduce incidence significantly. Same as in cyber security -- that you have no chance against a state level actor doesn't mean you shouldn't use good passwords and 2fa on your accounts. Because for some criminals effort becomes just not worth potential gain.
  - bitlax 7y ago
    At about the seven second mark in that video you'll briefly see the full shot that the camera is taking.

pavel_lishin 7y ago

> Thinking of UK football 'hooligan' violence, after lots of surveillance being installed within stadiums, violence enthusiasts organized their confrontations at areas reconnaissance proved to be unmonitored At the risk of sounding like a heartless libertarian, sounds like in this case, the outcome was a net positive. People who want to and are willing to suffer violence are going to a specialized place to do so, rather than involving a bunch of football fans who just want to see some people play a sport.

jrumbut 7y ago
Except for anyone who needs to make a living at the industrial park. There is a difference though between surveillance at a massive event known for both violence and family entertainment and wide area, persistent surveillance. I'm OK with a lot of cameras at stadiums, when they follow you home that's a problem.
- avanti 7y ago
  I doubt someone will have the time to follow you going home in the camera. When massive surveillance is deployed, there's such an enormous amount of data that police would only have time to review those related to crime.

UnFleshedOne 7y ago

So,.. I guess UK needs more cameras then?

olivermarks 7y ago
Unworkable, my point was people with bad intentions circumvent these systems. It's also a mystery why media release of surveillance footage of high importance areas appear to have been shot on mediocre quality old technology when so much is spent on the equipment. https://youtu.be/BR1s7az-f-k https://youtu.be/BR1s7az-f-k
- UnFleshedOne 7y ago
  I'm in general against mass surveillance (on privacy and potential for abuse grounds), but that a measure is not perfect and can be worked around with some skill and motivation is not a good argument against it on its own. It is possible for an imperfect system to increase minimum level of motivation sufficiently to reduce incidence significantly. Same as in cyber security -- that you have no chance against a state level actor doesn't mean you shouldn't use good passwords and 2fa on your accounts. Because for some criminals effort becomes just not worth potential gain.
- bitlax 7y ago
  At about the seven second mark in that video you'll briefly see the full shot that the camera is taking.