7 ms·

The Captured City

62 points by okfine 7y ago

nostromo 7y ago
I've been thinking about this a lot with regards to Waymo. Google already knows just about everything one can know about us on the internet. And if you use Google Maps or Android, they already know a lot about how you move through the real world... where you live, where you work, where you shop, who your friends and family are. Adding in a network of vehicles that are always "patrolling" the streets of every city, covered with sensors, driving us all around... It's a dataset that's any twentieth-century dictator's dream come true.
- germinalphrase 7y ago
  Only if the alternatives are made to go away.
  - kortilla 7y ago
    Not really. If google has a network of cars all over the public observing and over 75% of smartphone users feeding data to them, avoiding using google services directly doesn’t buy you nearly as much privacy as you think. Google even buys credit card transaction data so they have info on you even without a google account.
  - trickstra 7y ago
    Or if the company is compelled to hand over the data, accompanied with a gag order...
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  ”It's a dataset that's any twentieth-century dictator's dream come true.” That’s what I am thinking too. Together with devices that listen to what’s said in every home, services that track your every move on the internet and the real world, automated facial recognition and the ability to read all your communication the capabilities we have now would make the Nazis, Stalin or the Ingsoc party if “1984” very envious. They could only dream of having this.
carapace 7y ago
Ironically, the site loads google-analytics.com. - - - - > The idea of the captured city requires an adversarial view of a city’s inhabitants Maybe by definition, but consider the Peelian Principles : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles > The Peelian principles summarise the ideas that Sir Robert Peel developed to define an ethical police force. The approach expressed in these principles is commonly known as policing by consent ... > In this model of policing, police officers are regarded as citizens in uniform. They exercise their powers to police their fellow citizens with the implicit consent of those fellow citizens. "Policing by consent" indicates that the legitimacy of policing in the eyes of the public is based upon a general consensus of support that follows from transparency about their powers, their integrity in exercising those powers and their accountability for doing so. I think that these systems are more-or-less inevitable (they're happening already) and the big problem is making them self-reflexive: if we can police ourselves we can at least have a kinder, gentler tyranny of Mrs. Grundy.
- harimau777 7y ago
  I'm not sure I follow you. I don't think we have police by consent in America and I don't see how the idea applies to surveillance.
  - trothamel 7y ago
    Why don't you think that we have police by consent in America? The police are generally accountable to elected people. What's more, they are generally fairly popular. When asked: "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the police in the United States are doing their job?" 65% say yes, vs 26% no. https://www.pollingreport.com/crime.htm https://www.pollingreport.com/crime.htm
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - icebraining 7y ago
      Curiously, that page has a poll that seems relevant: "How concerned would you be about your own privacy if U.S. law enforcement starts using unmanned drones with high tech cameras and recording equipment? Would you be very concerned, somewhat concerned, only a little concerned, or not at all concerned?" Very concerned Somewhat concerned Only a little concerned Not at all concerned Unsure 7/25-30/13 49% 20% 15% 14% 2% (Not disagreeing with your point, mind you)

62 points by okfine 7y ago

I've been thinking about this a lot with regards to Waymo. Google already knows just about everything one can know about us on the internet. And if you use Google Maps or Android, they already know a lot about how you move through the real world... where you live, where you work, where you shop, who your friends and family are. Adding in a network of vehicles that are always "patrolling" the streets of every city, covered with sensors, driving us all around... It's a dataset that's any twentieth-century dictator's dream come true.

germinalphrase 7y ago
Only if the alternatives are made to go away.
- kortilla 7y ago
  Not really. If google has a network of cars all over the public observing and over 75% of smartphone users feeding data to them, avoiding using google services directly doesn’t buy you nearly as much privacy as you think. Google even buys credit card transaction data so they have info on you even without a google account.
- trickstra 7y ago
  Or if the company is compelled to hand over the data, accompanied with a gag order...
Ididntdothis 7y ago
”It's a dataset that's any twentieth-century dictator's dream come true.” That’s what I am thinking too. Together with devices that listen to what’s said in every home, services that track your every move on the internet and the real world, automated facial recognition and the ability to read all your communication the capabilities we have now would make the Nazis, Stalin or the Ingsoc party if “1984” very envious. They could only dream of having this.

carapace 7y ago

Ironically, the site loads google-analytics.com. - - - - > The idea of the captured city requires an adversarial view of a city’s inhabitants Maybe by definition, but consider the Peelian Principles : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles > The Peelian principles summarise the ideas that Sir Robert Peel developed to define an ethical police force. The approach expressed in these principles is commonly known as policing by consent ... > In this model of policing, police officers are regarded as citizens in uniform. They exercise their powers to police their fellow citizens with the implicit consent of those fellow citizens. "Policing by consent" indicates that the legitimacy of policing in the eyes of the public is based upon a general consensus of support that follows from transparency about their powers, their integrity in exercising those powers and their accountability for doing so. I think that these systems are more-or-less inevitable (they're happening already) and the big problem is making them self-reflexive: if we can police ourselves we can at least have a kinder, gentler tyranny of Mrs. Grundy.

harimau777 7y ago
I'm not sure I follow you. I don't think we have police by consent in America and I don't see how the idea applies to surveillance.
- trothamel 7y ago
  Why don't you think that we have police by consent in America? The police are generally accountable to elected people. What's more, they are generally fairly popular. When asked: "Do you approve or disapprove of the way the police in the United States are doing their job?" 65% say yes, vs 26% no. https://www.pollingreport.com/crime.htm https://www.pollingreport.com/crime.htm
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - icebraining 7y ago
    Curiously, that page has a poll that seems relevant: "How concerned would you be about your own privacy if U.S. law enforcement starts using unmanned drones with high tech cameras and recording equipment? Would you be very concerned, somewhat concerned, only a little concerned, or not at all concerned?" Very concerned Somewhat concerned Only a little concerned Not at all concerned Unsure 7/25-30/13 49% 20% 15% 14% 2% (Not disagreeing with your point, mind you)