3 ms·

Exclusive top-down surveillance also makes possible all kinds of abuses. We should put some thought into which scenario has the worst failure modes, and in doin

Exclusive top-down surveillance also makes possible all kinds of abuses. We should put some thought into which scenario has the worst failure modes, and in doing so we should remember our history.

raxxorrax 7y ago
No top down surveillance would be my preference and it isn't that hard to imagine really. Certainly you can get the impression that people currently don't really value privacy, but if it is taken from them, there will be quite a sudden interest.
- loudmax 7y ago
  Many of us grew up with no top down surveillance in the 80s and 90s. In that world, no top down surveillance is easy to imagine. In a world where network connected cameras are so cheap they're disposable, no top down surveillance becomes harder to imagine. At some point, information gathering systems become so cheap and ubiquitous that telling organizations not to use them for surveillance is like telling people not to look up at the sky. Banks used to ask your mother's maiden name as a security question because someone trying to impersonate you would have a hard time finding that information. Now it's a Facebook search away, and many entities still want to use personal identifiable information as security questions. As a society we need to reevaluate what personal information is private and what is public.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    I don't think any of this is inevitable. In fact it is quite illegal in many cases. Availability doesn't imply use. Especially since we even have falling crime numbers, increasing security still has become some religious dogma for some. Basic control freaks in my opinion, although there is also the other crowd thinking they are constantly under personal surveillance. Similar fears I imagine. While there are efforts to bring more people to engage in civil society, where we don't wear masks, increasing surveillance will have the opposite effect because of basic self defense mechanisms that shouldn't be to hard to understand in my opinion. > As a society we need to reevaluate what personal information is private and what is public. I like to decide that myself and for bureaucratic needs I will supply the minimum amount of data needed for processing.

Exclusive top-down surveillance also makes possible all kinds of abuses. We should put some thought into which scenario has the worst failure modes, and in doing so we should remember our history.

raxxorrax 7y ago

No top down surveillance would be my preference and it isn't that hard to imagine really. Certainly you can get the impression that people currently don't really value privacy, but if it is taken from them, there will be quite a sudden interest.

loudmax 7y ago
Many of us grew up with no top down surveillance in the 80s and 90s. In that world, no top down surveillance is easy to imagine. In a world where network connected cameras are so cheap they're disposable, no top down surveillance becomes harder to imagine. At some point, information gathering systems become so cheap and ubiquitous that telling organizations not to use them for surveillance is like telling people not to look up at the sky. Banks used to ask your mother's maiden name as a security question because someone trying to impersonate you would have a hard time finding that information. Now it's a Facebook search away, and many entities still want to use personal identifiable information as security questions. As a society we need to reevaluate what personal information is private and what is public.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  I don't think any of this is inevitable. In fact it is quite illegal in many cases. Availability doesn't imply use. Especially since we even have falling crime numbers, increasing security still has become some religious dogma for some. Basic control freaks in my opinion, although there is also the other crowd thinking they are constantly under personal surveillance. Similar fears I imagine. While there are efforts to bring more people to engage in civil society, where we don't wear masks, increasing surveillance will have the opposite effect because of basic self defense mechanisms that shouldn't be to hard to understand in my opinion. > As a society we need to reevaluate what personal information is private and what is public. I like to decide that myself and for bureaucratic needs I will supply the minimum amount of data needed for processing.