4 ms·

If it helps, this is a very realistic portrayal of how privacy is degraded over time. Invading privacy has all sorts of practical applications. You can fight cr

If it helps, this is a very realistic portrayal of how privacy is degraded over time. Invading privacy has all sorts of practical applications. You can fight crime more effectively, and measure trends, and generally be more effective at all sorts of capitalism and statecraft. But, problems, and risks just pile up over time. Just think of what we could do for just one small sacrifice!

panzagl 7y ago
But what privacy is there in a classroom? Theoretically the teacher could capture the same information by being more observant.
- everdrive 7y ago
  A wise teacher can offer a bit more dignity by choosing what they notice and draw attention to, or not.
  - skybrian 7y ago
    Perhaps the same is true when choosing how to use video recordings?
    - everdrive 7y ago
      Maybe. They're more ubiquitous, and almost certainly available to more parties. Can I really exercise my own judgement when my boss can watch the tape too?
      - EpicEng 7y ago
        My wife is a teacher and I promise you that principals don't want to have to manage their teacher's classes. They only step in when required or asked to.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- saagarjha 7y ago
  No teacher can watch the entire classroom constantly and unfailingly.
- elliekelly 7y ago
  But the teacher doesn’t create a permanent record of everything they observe.
- streb-lo 7y ago
  I agree with you (my wife is also a teacher) but good luck with this crowd. Some of the HN commenters are counting down the days until someone founds a libertarian utopian moon colony.
  - DickingAround 7y ago
    As a libertarian looking foreward to a moon base... Im totally good w cameras in the hands of civilians. I use my closed loop, not online connected, home serveilance system every month: saw at least 4 crimes and even caght a home invader. Passed the info we want to the cops but not all. We dont all hate cams: Some of us just dont want gov to have them on us all the time.
behringer 7y ago
And let's get real here about how we solve problems with decreased privacy. Good luck ever getting an official to do anything for you. If it does not benefit them or the system, they never have the time or authority to do it. The surveillance is to benefit the state, not the surveilled.
- skybrian 7y ago
  This is abstraction. How do you apply that to the case of a teacher sending misbehaving kids to the principal's office, and what would you want instead?
  - behringer 7y ago
    We've never required surveillance to send kids to the office before...
    - nostrademons 7y ago
      Having a teacher in the room has the same "you're being watched" effect as a camera, it's just less efficient at watching. I want to highlight the tension between liberty & socialization here, because I think it's getting glossed over. Public education is a huge infringement on individual liberty - it's basically mandatory brainwashing of kids for 6-8 hours/day, 180 days/year, for 12 years. Nobody would realistically suggest getting rid of it, because we all grew up with it. Taking it back a step, parenting is also an infringement on individual liberty - a child is totally dependent upon a parent, and oftentimes exposed to nothing other than the parent's views, and is biologically hard-wired to pick up on a parent's emotions and mirror them. Can't really blame society for that, though, evolution did it. People who worry about the slippery slope are right to worry. But it's been going on for centuries. We think that our particular point on it is natural and right because that's what we grew up with, just as our kids might think pervasive surveillance is natural and right because that's what they grew up with - which is exactly what we're justifiably afraid of. If we lived on individual farming homesteads and someone proposed taking our kids away from us for the majority of their waking childhood, we'd probably be even more upset. Probably the endgame is like the Matrix, where humans are confined to individual pods with no agency of their own, except that instead of being tapped for bio-energy we'll end up being used to train machine-learning algorithms.

panzagl 7y ago

But what privacy is there in a classroom? Theoretically the teacher could capture the same information by being more observant.

everdrive 7y ago
A wise teacher can offer a bit more dignity by choosing what they notice and draw attention to, or not.
- skybrian 7y ago
  Perhaps the same is true when choosing how to use video recordings?
  - everdrive 7y ago
    Maybe. They're more ubiquitous, and almost certainly available to more parties. Can I really exercise my own judgement when my boss can watch the tape too?
    - EpicEng 7y ago
      My wife is a teacher and I promise you that principals don't want to have to manage their teacher's classes. They only step in when required or asked to.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
saagarjha 7y ago
No teacher can watch the entire classroom constantly and unfailingly.
elliekelly 7y ago
But the teacher doesn’t create a permanent record of everything they observe.
streb-lo 7y ago
I agree with you (my wife is also a teacher) but good luck with this crowd. Some of the HN commenters are counting down the days until someone founds a libertarian utopian moon colony.
- DickingAround 7y ago
  As a libertarian looking foreward to a moon base... Im totally good w cameras in the hands of civilians. I use my closed loop, not online connected, home serveilance system every month: saw at least 4 crimes and even caght a home invader. Passed the info we want to the cops but not all. We dont all hate cams: Some of us just dont want gov to have them on us all the time.

behringer 7y ago

And let's get real here about how we solve problems with decreased privacy. Good luck ever getting an official to do anything for you. If it does not benefit them or the system, they never have the time or authority to do it. The surveillance is to benefit the state, not the surveilled.

skybrian 7y ago
This is abstraction. How do you apply that to the case of a teacher sending misbehaving kids to the principal's office, and what would you want instead?
- behringer 7y ago
  We've never required surveillance to send kids to the office before...
  - nostrademons 7y ago
    Having a teacher in the room has the same "you're being watched" effect as a camera, it's just less efficient at watching. I want to highlight the tension between liberty & socialization here, because I think it's getting glossed over. Public education is a huge infringement on individual liberty - it's basically mandatory brainwashing of kids for 6-8 hours/day, 180 days/year, for 12 years. Nobody would realistically suggest getting rid of it, because we all grew up with it. Taking it back a step, parenting is also an infringement on individual liberty - a child is totally dependent upon a parent, and oftentimes exposed to nothing other than the parent's views, and is biologically hard-wired to pick up on a parent's emotions and mirror them. Can't really blame society for that, though, evolution did it. People who worry about the slippery slope are right to worry. But it's been going on for centuries. We think that our particular point on it is natural and right because that's what we grew up with, just as our kids might think pervasive surveillance is natural and right because that's what they grew up with - which is exactly what we're justifiably afraid of. If we lived on individual farming homesteads and someone proposed taking our kids away from us for the majority of their waking childhood, we'd probably be even more upset. Probably the endgame is like the Matrix, where humans are confined to individual pods with no agency of their own, except that instead of being tapped for bio-energy we'll end up being used to train machine-learning algorithms.