3 ms·

I want to be surveilled everywhere I go, because I trust corporations and the government to safeguard that information and never abuse it. After all, corporatio

I want to be surveilled everywhere I go, because I trust corporations and the government to safeguard that information and never abuse it. After all, corporations and governments have never acted against the best interests of the people in the past, so there is no risk in them having a live-updating data set on the locations, activities, companions, and sentiments of every American. Is that what people think? We are letting this shit run wild on us, and if the future is anything other than a bonafide utopia (spoilers: it's not going to be that), people are going to pay for our present naivete.

nojvek 7y ago
Playing the devil’s advocate here. Suppose in the perfect world we got to design ideal surveillance, how would it work? You could track every person and item in public space and automatically fine a percentage of net income for violations. Think in terms of enhanced red light and speed cameras. The system would store everything encrypted in a distributed system. Data would automatically get wiped out after 30 days. The public would be able to verify this (open source code and public access logs) Any humans accessing the feeds would need a court order specifying time span + place + item being searched for and a good reason why. The court orders would be also be publicly accessible. May be a blockchain which is append only and distributed. Some form of hard mechanisms to prevent anyone being above the law. If anyone abuses access, they’d stand a trial too) Access would would blur out all other faces other than person being investigated. Basically what I’m saying is let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. Good Surveillance may offer the means to quickly find violators and deter crime. A car got stolen. Boom, easily identified. A kid got lost/kidnapped. Instant search. Some asshole didn’t cleanup after their dog pooped. They think twice. Littering in public space. Nay nay. Whether we like it or not, with the advance of cheap cameras, cheap processing power and advanced computer vision algorithms/neural nets. Surveillance is coming. It’s a god like power. I believe we should at-least be having conversations on safe and trust worthy surveillance. Facebook/Google already know what everyone is doing. We don’t know what they are doing with our data. The information asymmetry is a problem.
- caconym_ 7y ago
  > I believe we should at-least be having conversations on safe and trust worthy surveillance. Yeah, we should, but we aren't. Or, at least, the people actually involved in advancing the state of surveillance either aren't participating in such conversations, or are there for appearances only and don't really give a shit what the other participants have to say. You don't have to be paying much attention to see that there's basically zero accountability and zero effort to protect the public in what I guess I might call the surveillance-industrial complex. Believe me, I see the theoretical potential and value of surveillance for keeping people safe, but it's sort of like the idea of a benevolent robot dictator who makes perfect decisions to maximize good and minimize bad. Even a shaky first-pass implementation of such a thing is way beyond our capabilities, and if done even slightly wrong it could be a global catastrophe. Surveillance is a bit different because we're starting to have the technology to make it happen, but we don't have the social machinery necessary to do it effectively or responsibly.

nojvek 7y ago

Playing the devil’s advocate here. Suppose in the perfect world we got to design ideal surveillance, how would it work? You could track every person and item in public space and automatically fine a percentage of net income for violations. Think in terms of enhanced red light and speed cameras. The system would store everything encrypted in a distributed system. Data would automatically get wiped out after 30 days. The public would be able to verify this (open source code and public access logs) Any humans accessing the feeds would need a court order specifying time span + place + item being searched for and a good reason why. The court orders would be also be publicly accessible. May be a blockchain which is append only and distributed. Some form of hard mechanisms to prevent anyone being above the law. If anyone abuses access, they’d stand a trial too) Access would would blur out all other faces other than person being investigated. Basically what I’m saying is let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. Good Surveillance may offer the means to quickly find violators and deter crime. A car got stolen. Boom, easily identified. A kid got lost/kidnapped. Instant search. Some asshole didn’t cleanup after their dog pooped. They think twice. Littering in public space. Nay nay. Whether we like it or not, with the advance of cheap cameras, cheap processing power and advanced computer vision algorithms/neural nets. Surveillance is coming. It’s a god like power. I believe we should at-least be having conversations on safe and trust worthy surveillance. Facebook/Google already know what everyone is doing. We don’t know what they are doing with our data. The information asymmetry is a problem.

caconym_ 7y ago
> I believe we should at-least be having conversations on safe and trust worthy surveillance. Yeah, we should, but we aren't. Or, at least, the people actually involved in advancing the state of surveillance either aren't participating in such conversations, or are there for appearances only and don't really give a shit what the other participants have to say. You don't have to be paying much attention to see that there's basically zero accountability and zero effort to protect the public in what I guess I might call the surveillance-industrial complex. Believe me, I see the theoretical potential and value of surveillance for keeping people safe, but it's sort of like the idea of a benevolent robot dictator who makes perfect decisions to maximize good and minimize bad. Even a shaky first-pass implementation of such a thing is way beyond our capabilities, and if done even slightly wrong it could be a global catastrophe. Surveillance is a bit different because we're starting to have the technology to make it happen, but we don't have the social machinery necessary to do it effectively or responsibly.