5 ms·

Every single time the topic of surveillance or heavy-handed governance comes up, I'm surprised to see how nobody brings up the fact that it's always one-sided:

Every single time the topic of surveillance or heavy-handed governance comes up, I'm surprised to see how nobody brings up the fact that it's always one-sided: They can see you, but you can't see them. This is tyranny. The people in power can do anything anytime anywhere they want and you'll never know, unless other people in power tell you about it. There is an ever deepening divide in our society and eventually the people on the lower side will never be able to touch the people on the upper side, and if there's ever a global catastrophe, we'll be left behind to fend for ourselves.

matz1 7y ago
Yes, we need more government transparency and openess. They can see us, we should also be able to see them. In a way technology can help us. Technology can help democratize survaliance.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- chillacy 7y ago
  I've heard it called "Sousveillance"
- coldtea 7y ago
  How about no surveillance and other such "solutions" in need of a problem?
  - carapace 7y ago
    How do you ensure no one is using surveillance without a good surveillance system?
    - coldtea 7y ago
      With a good "gets thrown to jail" system if they're found to be using surveillance. If they can use surveillance and keep it forever secret and with no public artifacts from it shown, let them do it...
  - SN76477 7y ago
    No surveillance without a warrant. If you do not know what you are specifically looking for you should not be looking.
    - aeternum 7y ago
      Attempting to make this illegal isn't going to work. Even regular people have this kind of power now. A modern cellphone camera with a good vantage point and some decent software has sufficient optics and resolution to track thousands of people. Check out the zoom capabilities of Huawei P30 as an example.
      - coldtea 7y ago
        >Attempting to make this illegal isn't going to work. Even regular people have this kind of power now. They might have this kind of power, but they don't have enough scale and other power (p.x. state power) to matter as much as a state or company like Google doing it... And if it's illegal they can always be busted for using it, and their private surveillance results could be automatically rejected as court evidence for anything, making them even more useless except for e.g. blackmail or something (still illegal).
  - matz1 7y ago
    You essentially trying to stop technological progress, that is not realistic imo.
    - coldtea 7y ago
      Well, I believe that we should be totally able to stop technological progress, and not have autonomous "technological progress" for the sake of progress. We should have targeted progress, in the areas we want to improve and which is beneficial, and not in other areas, which is not beneficial or has negative externalities or adverse second and third order effects... The same way governments try to control e.g. nuclear proliferation. Here's an example: would you be ok with a nuclear-equivalent technology that could be made by anyone in their homes, with simple materials and be able to e.g. wipe out an entire city? Surely, it would be a technological and engineering progress. But just as surely as that, I'd rather we regressed technologically and prohibited access to the materials etc, than have that be available to every idiot, madman and bigot. Now, you might say that "it's impossible", but I don't think so. In a democracy nothing should be impossible, and political and cultural action could be made to curtail certain technologies. That's not unlike Kurwzeil and Musk, notable technologists, warning against AI singularity...
      - matz1 7y ago
        Sure, its possible but do most human want that? I doubt it. Imo, Technological progress is mostly driven by natural human desire. Personally, I want technological progess and willing to work hard to make sure it happen. That includes technology that makes survaliance better and easier. The issue with privacy is imo, instead we try to hide the information, we should fix whatever it is that make us suffer when the information become public.
anigbrowl 7y ago
They can see you, but you can't see them. Not to dispute your very valid point, but the second half isn't as true as you think.
aeternum 7y ago
It is somewhat one-sided, but not completely: Citizens for example have been able to track the classified X-37 missions due to advances in optics and technology. Electronic files have made it easier for whistleblowers to exfiltrate large amounts of data. That would likely be much more difficult with physical files. It is much harder for governments to hide their behavior now that every citizen has a high-res camera in their pocket capable of real-time streaming to a wide audience. It is much easier for citizens to communicate and organize. Even if the government backdoors popular communication apps, mesh networking and endpoint encryption are still possible (I.E. Firechat).

matz1 7y ago

Yes, we need more government transparency and openess. They can see us, we should also be able to see them. In a way technology can help us. Technology can help democratize survaliance.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
chillacy 7y ago
I've heard it called "Sousveillance"
coldtea 7y ago
How about no surveillance and other such "solutions" in need of a problem?
- carapace 7y ago
  How do you ensure no one is using surveillance without a good surveillance system?
  - coldtea 7y ago
    With a good "gets thrown to jail" system if they're found to be using surveillance. If they can use surveillance and keep it forever secret and with no public artifacts from it shown, let them do it...
- SN76477 7y ago
  No surveillance without a warrant. If you do not know what you are specifically looking for you should not be looking.
  - aeternum 7y ago
    Attempting to make this illegal isn't going to work. Even regular people have this kind of power now. A modern cellphone camera with a good vantage point and some decent software has sufficient optics and resolution to track thousands of people. Check out the zoom capabilities of Huawei P30 as an example.
    - coldtea 7y ago
      >Attempting to make this illegal isn't going to work. Even regular people have this kind of power now. They might have this kind of power, but they don't have enough scale and other power (p.x. state power) to matter as much as a state or company like Google doing it... And if it's illegal they can always be busted for using it, and their private surveillance results could be automatically rejected as court evidence for anything, making them even more useless except for e.g. blackmail or something (still illegal).
- matz1 7y ago
  You essentially trying to stop technological progress, that is not realistic imo.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    Well, I believe that we should be totally able to stop technological progress, and not have autonomous "technological progress" for the sake of progress. We should have targeted progress, in the areas we want to improve and which is beneficial, and not in other areas, which is not beneficial or has negative externalities or adverse second and third order effects... The same way governments try to control e.g. nuclear proliferation. Here's an example: would you be ok with a nuclear-equivalent technology that could be made by anyone in their homes, with simple materials and be able to e.g. wipe out an entire city? Surely, it would be a technological and engineering progress. But just as surely as that, I'd rather we regressed technologically and prohibited access to the materials etc, than have that be available to every idiot, madman and bigot. Now, you might say that "it's impossible", but I don't think so. In a democracy nothing should be impossible, and political and cultural action could be made to curtail certain technologies. That's not unlike Kurwzeil and Musk, notable technologists, warning against AI singularity...
    - matz1 7y ago
      Sure, its possible but do most human want that? I doubt it. Imo, Technological progress is mostly driven by natural human desire. Personally, I want technological progess and willing to work hard to make sure it happen. That includes technology that makes survaliance better and easier. The issue with privacy is imo, instead we try to hide the information, we should fix whatever it is that make us suffer when the information become public.

anigbrowl 7y ago

They can see you, but you can't see them. Not to dispute your very valid point, but the second half isn't as true as you think.

aeternum 7y ago

It is somewhat one-sided, but not completely: Citizens for example have been able to track the classified X-37 missions due to advances in optics and technology. Electronic files have made it easier for whistleblowers to exfiltrate large amounts of data. That would likely be much more difficult with physical files. It is much harder for governments to hide their behavior now that every citizen has a high-res camera in their pocket capable of real-time streaming to a wide audience. It is much easier for citizens to communicate and organize. Even if the government backdoors popular communication apps, mesh networking and endpoint encryption are still possible (I.E. Firechat).