3 ms·

I mentioned this on another post last week [0] but this is a very different situation, the person filming is clearly targetting specific people. Set up a promin

I mentioned this on another post last week [0] but this is a very different situation, the person filming is clearly targetting specific people. Set up a prominent video camera in the corner of a public space for a more comparable scenario - you will have a minority of people who will be hugely offended by this, and the majority of people who will say "huh, I don't see the problem". > Surveillance camera man reveals people's true feelings. No, surveillance camera man reveals peoples feelings at having a person standing next to them with a camera, not their feelings on having their data and movements tracked with precision. The scenarios _are_ very different, and by equating the two, the real issue is getting lost. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27808435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27808435

titzer 5y ago
People don't seem to understand that a datacenter full of 100,000 CPUs and 100PB of storage is tantamount to sticking a camera in every single person's face 24/7. Whether that is because the footage is just indexed and stored, analyzed later when interesting, or analyzed in realtime, it's really no different. Be accused of a crime, be framed for a crime, share the wrong opinion about a political figure, or be in the wrong spot at the wrong time, and you are a target. And really, you're being modeled and studied for "market research" purposes all the dang time. > The scenarios _are_ very different, and by equating the two, the real issue is getting lost. Stop saying that. If anything, mass surveillance is much, much worse.
- maccard 5y ago
  > is tantamount to sticking a camera in every single person's face 24/7 It's not. Having a drone flying beside you 24/7 would be the same. It's much closer to having a video camera sitting in the corner of a room with a red blinking light. > Stop saying that. If anything, mass surveillance is much, much worse. I won't stop saying it, because they're not the same. Mass surveillance _is_ worse.
  - titzer 5y ago
    You still don't understand my point because of some quibble you have about your immediate experience of surveillance, and not how it operates on the backend, how it impacts society, and ultimately your life in the long run. Mass surveillance is silent, unblinking, all-seeing (like Hal in 2001), all-knowing, all-correlating. But it seems that if your personal experience is not impacted, then it's all fine. I dunno, maybe it isn't all fine compared to you, but your comments downplay and deflect. > Mass surveillance _is_ worse. Well then I am confused about your point, because it seems like you want to agree but argue, needlessly attacking someone trying to raise awareness.

titzer 5y ago

People don't seem to understand that a datacenter full of 100,000 CPUs and 100PB of storage is tantamount to sticking a camera in every single person's face 24/7. Whether that is because the footage is just indexed and stored, analyzed later when interesting, or analyzed in realtime, it's really no different. Be accused of a crime, be framed for a crime, share the wrong opinion about a political figure, or be in the wrong spot at the wrong time, and you are a target. And really, you're being modeled and studied for "market research" purposes all the dang time. > The scenarios _are_ very different, and by equating the two, the real issue is getting lost. Stop saying that. If anything, mass surveillance is much, much worse.

maccard 5y ago
> is tantamount to sticking a camera in every single person's face 24/7 It's not. Having a drone flying beside you 24/7 would be the same. It's much closer to having a video camera sitting in the corner of a room with a red blinking light. > Stop saying that. If anything, mass surveillance is much, much worse. I won't stop saying it, because they're not the same. Mass surveillance _is_ worse.
- titzer 5y ago
  You still don't understand my point because of some quibble you have about your immediate experience of surveillance, and not how it operates on the backend, how it impacts society, and ultimately your life in the long run. Mass surveillance is silent, unblinking, all-seeing (like Hal in 2001), all-knowing, all-correlating. But it seems that if your personal experience is not impacted, then it's all fine. I dunno, maybe it isn't all fine compared to you, but your comments downplay and deflect. > Mass surveillance _is_ worse. Well then I am confused about your point, because it seems like you want to agree but argue, needlessly attacking someone trying to raise awareness.