4 ms·
Guys, here's a wild idea: let's have more cameras owned by individuals which will be used to track specifically politicians and law enforcement officials. Use f
by badrabbit 7y ago
Guys, here's a wild idea: let's have more cameras owned by individuals which will be used to track specifically politicians and law enforcement officials. Use facial recognition and gait analysis to identify them and analyze their mood,associations,behaviors,etc... Use high DPI long range cams where possible. Ask people to share their ring,etc...
I just don't know how to scare society enough. Maybe use this techs explicitly against specific demographics. Abuse it against democrats and republicans. Track and publish analysis of every trump supporter, bernie sanders supporter,minorities, I don't know just hit everyones sensitive sweet spots to show them "we can do this legally!!" Because the people that will profit from this will certainly not make their practice public enough to be visible by lawmakers and society at large.
The tech is moving magnitudes faster than the law.
Essentially use it against them in a very hostile way to force them to take this seriously.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ramshorns 7y agoAs a side effect this might cause people who care about privacy to never run for office.
- petre 7y agoIf you care about privacy you don't run for office anyway. Nosy journalists and opponents will look into your history and watch your every move once you do.
- bamboozled 7y agoWhat do you expect the average person to do about it? In the end we have psychopaths owning democracy and until this is resolved (which it might never be) expect more of the same. I like your idea about surveillance of the surveillance, I’m sure there are already millions of places this happens. Imagine what Google knows about Trump?
- badrabbit 7y agoIf a site/service is built to do this, the average person just shares footage. The "psycopaths" that own democracy can't get reelected if their activites are plotted on a map, their license plates tracked to show where they spend their time, high dpi cams from long distance being used to read their lips. Their associates being subject to the same level of scrutiny as well. Essentially, what I am saying is they don't care about the people so let's make them care about themselves
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- microcolonel 7y ago> specifically politicians and law enforcement officials How about known criminals. More cameras owned and controlled (for real) by individuals is enough. I have heard about massive improvements in public safety in places where people have Ring, or similar things. I'm not too keen on Amazon being an operator, as unfortunate as it would be if they were judged for things they don't do, it'd be worse if it turned out to be a genuine dragnet. Nonetheless, I'm not anti surveillance, provided it's up to individual and business location operators to disseminate or not (except by subpoena). I plan on installing more surveillance cameras.
- badrabbit 7y agoAnd that bullshit is what they use to argue for it as well. It's not just a camera, that's the whole point. How the tech can be abused needs to be understood and relevant laws need to be implemented like yesterday.
- adatavizguy 7y ago> analyze their mood,associations,behaviors,etc. That is a good motivation to practice Zen mindfulness meditation.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- abhs 7y agoWhat you're saying resonates with the plot of the movie "The Circle".
- dest 7y agoI like the idea, but isn't it forbidden by law, by the state itself? Not only the politicians themselves could be monitored, but also their families, children, life partners… Though, it could create two worlds. The area around the policitian's houses, that would be clean of cameras, and the others, infested by cams.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]