4 ms·

Yet another reason why I’m sad the UK is leaving the EU. I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world - or at least we’re the ‘most wat

Yet another reason why I’m sad the UK is leaving the EU. I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world - or at least we’re the ‘most watched’ by sone other measure.

johneth 7y ago
> I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world Bear in mind that the vast majority of those cameras are privately-owned (i.e. shops, homes, etc.), not operated by the state.
- borjamoya 7y ago
  Sometimes it's hard to tell where the line is, isn't it?
  - johneth 7y ago
    Not really, no. If it's in a shop, it'll be operated by the shop. If it's in a supermarket car park, it'll be operated by the supermarket. If it's in a public park, pedestrianised street, or government building, it'll be state-operated.
- shkkmo 7y ago
  Or in the increasing number of public spaces that are privately owned. If advanced facial recognition is being used, does it really matter who owns the cameras? Especially once that data is put up for sale...
borjamoya 7y ago
I moved recently to London and one of the things that I find surprising is that surveillance is seen as normal. In fact, last Sunday there was a facial recognition deployment in Cardiff during the football match. There was a group of fans concerned about this technology--they were being targeted after all. But a lot of people just saw this as normal. Here's a picture I took of the deployment: https://borjamoya.com/media/nl/cardiff-facial-recognition.jpg https://borjamoya.com/media/nl/cardiff-facial-recognition.jp...
dgellow 7y ago
I understand your feeling. If I can share a different point of view, that’s a regulation that can be done at the level of the country, it doesn’t have to be imposed by a supranational organization. The main benefits of sovereignty is to be able to take that kind of decision without negotiating with and convincing other countries (so you can in theory be faster). What I want to say: the UK doesn’t need the EU to protect their citizens privacy. But I understand what you say: the UK doesn’t seem to care about privacy, if it were in the EU it wouldn’t have a choice but to follow the rules.
cs02rm0 7y ago
This is still a good thing and, if it happens, would add weight to making the arguments for similar restrictions in the UK.
pcr910303 7y ago
> I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world - or at least we’re the ‘most watched’ by sone other measure. I'm very (culturally?) surprised (and was a bit refreshing) that this is something considered negatively. In our country there's always this pressure to add more CCTVs to make the country safer, and CCTVs are generally seen as good, not bad. I don't really know about UK, but maybe it's the difference of the trust on the government that they won't surveil? Does anybody have pointers on reasons of the difference of the view?
- saiya-jin 7y ago
  Blindly trusting one's government ain't a good recipe for long term freedom and happiness. It might look OK or even justified now, but nobody knows what happens in the future and this is sort of one-way road. Imagine social credit system in China and go further. Sooner or later somebody craving for absolute power and control will start abusing it, be it in intelligence or government (or both). And in top politics there are tons of imbalanced folks who have pretty messed up views on the world and what is right and wrong (normal decent folks wouldn't stand long all the machinations and backstabbing happening constantly)
  - pcr910303 7y ago
    > Blindly trusting one's government ain't a good recipe for long term freedom and happiness. Of course I'm not advocating blindly trusting the government, but we generally do trust the government until it reveals otherwise. After all, CCTVs are really just a tradeoff; they are for citizens safety, and accessing it is very restricted for privacy reasons. > this is sort of one-way road [snip] > Sooner or later somebody craving for absolute power and control will start abusing it, be it in intelligence or government (or both). I'm not sure if it really is; democracy is there for a reason. (We have impeached our president in 2017 for various reasons - which for many people in our country, was a living example that sometimes politics work after all :-))

Yet another reason why I’m sad the UK is leaving the EU. I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world - or at least we’re the ‘most watched’ by sone other measure.

johneth 7y ago

> I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world Bear in mind that the vast majority of those cameras are privately-owned (i.e. shops, homes, etc.), not operated by the state.

borjamoya 7y ago
Sometimes it's hard to tell where the line is, isn't it?
- johneth 7y ago
  Not really, no. If it's in a shop, it'll be operated by the shop. If it's in a supermarket car park, it'll be operated by the supermarket. If it's in a public park, pedestrianised street, or government building, it'll be state-operated.
shkkmo 7y ago
Or in the increasing number of public spaces that are privately owned. If advanced facial recognition is being used, does it really matter who owns the cameras? Especially once that data is put up for sale...

borjamoya 7y ago

I moved recently to London and one of the things that I find surprising is that surveillance is seen as normal. In fact, last Sunday there was a facial recognition deployment in Cardiff during the football match. There was a group of fans concerned about this technology--they were being targeted after all. But a lot of people just saw this as normal. Here's a picture I took of the deployment: https://borjamoya.com/media/nl/cardiff-facial-recognition.jpg https://borjamoya.com/media/nl/cardiff-facial-recognition.jp...

dgellow 7y ago

I understand your feeling. If I can share a different point of view, that’s a regulation that can be done at the level of the country, it doesn’t have to be imposed by a supranational organization. The main benefits of sovereignty is to be able to take that kind of decision without negotiating with and convincing other countries (so you can in theory be faster). What I want to say: the UK doesn’t need the EU to protect their citizens privacy. But I understand what you say: the UK doesn’t seem to care about privacy, if it were in the EU it wouldn’t have a choice but to follow the rules.

cs02rm0 7y ago

This is still a good thing and, if it happens, would add weight to making the arguments for similar restrictions in the UK.

pcr910303 7y ago

> I believe we also have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world - or at least we’re the ‘most watched’ by sone other measure. I'm very (culturally?) surprised (and was a bit refreshing) that this is something considered negatively. In our country there's always this pressure to add more CCTVs to make the country safer, and CCTVs are generally seen as good, not bad. I don't really know about UK, but maybe it's the difference of the trust on the government that they won't surveil? Does anybody have pointers on reasons of the difference of the view?

saiya-jin 7y ago
Blindly trusting one's government ain't a good recipe for long term freedom and happiness. It might look OK or even justified now, but nobody knows what happens in the future and this is sort of one-way road. Imagine social credit system in China and go further. Sooner or later somebody craving for absolute power and control will start abusing it, be it in intelligence or government (or both). And in top politics there are tons of imbalanced folks who have pretty messed up views on the world and what is right and wrong (normal decent folks wouldn't stand long all the machinations and backstabbing happening constantly)
- pcr910303 7y ago
  > Blindly trusting one's government ain't a good recipe for long term freedom and happiness. Of course I'm not advocating blindly trusting the government, but we generally do trust the government until it reveals otherwise. After all, CCTVs are really just a tradeoff; they are for citizens safety, and accessing it is very restricted for privacy reasons. > this is sort of one-way road [snip] > Sooner or later somebody craving for absolute power and control will start abusing it, be it in intelligence or government (or both). I'm not sure if it really is; democracy is there for a reason. (We have impeached our president in 2017 for various reasons - which for many people in our country, was a living example that sometimes politics work after all :-))