I don't see how 1984 is relevant here. The surveillance we have today far surpasses the simple ideas in that book. > Uhh, why do you think that? Because the p

I don't see how 1984 is relevant here. The surveillance we have today far surpasses the simple ideas in that book. > Uhh, why do you think that? Because the people building the facial recognition pretty much say so? "Organize the world's information and make it universally accessible" does not sound like marketing opportunities or criminal-catching to me! It sounds like a desire for total corporate control over the physical and digital world. Not to mention, it is the logical end of using this technology; "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely". Having such a powerful and omnipotent surveillance system in place enables totalitarian control over populations. This happens through chilling effects, through terrorism, mental boxing-in of populations ceding their free will to the government. Knowing that your own face is tracked everywhere you go and sold off to anyone and owned by your own government or other governments is dehumanizing. Do this for decades or centuries and you will have a very humanized and defeated population. > So far, I only see evidence that mass surveillance is to catch criminals and for marketing. I don't see any evidence like you are describing. I feel like we're living in different worlds.