4 ms·

"Cameras don't fix homelessness or addiction or underfunded services. They just make life harder for regular people." In what way do cameras make life harder f

"Cameras don't fix homelessness or addiction or underfunded services. They just make life harder for regular people." In what way do cameras make life harder for regular people? If anything rampant crime (and progressive legal systems' unwillingness to lock up repeat offenders for a long time or at all) makes life much harder for regular people than a camera just sitting there.

ggoo 6mo ago
Surveillance tech can alter peoples behavior. I know I'm personally more stressed when I know I'm being filmed, even if I'm doing nothing wrong. https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2024/1/niae039/7920510?login=false https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2024/1/niae039/7920510?l...
- jamiequint 6mo ago
  Untrue at a population level, just compare anxiety disorders and self-reported anxiety between USA and China.
  - qbit42 6mo ago
    There are certainly no other causal factors... I'm not saying that it couldn't be true, but we have no way of concluding that from just comparing such rates. There are many differences in daily life and thresholds for reporting beyond surveillance levels.
  - Barrin92 6mo ago
    anxiety in the sense you're talking about is a function of private surveillance and in that regard America is much worse. State led surveillance in Chinese public spaces is real and effective in producing compliance (20 years ago public theft, pulling people off motorcycles was a daily occurrence) but in private China is a significantly freer society. Foucault used to distinguish between models of authority that operate on "make die and let live" vs "let die and make live". China's the former, the US with its moral busybodies both in progressive and religious flavors the latter. The US now is a society of public disorder and personal policing, China is a society of public order and largely indifference in private life. Of course the former creates anxiety. American Beauty, a film about permanent surveillance without any state, would make no sense in China.
  - tokioyoyo 6mo ago
    I think it’s a cultural thing. On average, people seem to hate cops more in the USA. Personally I like having little cop boxes in 5 minute walking distances in Tokyo. There are people who are very against it, bring up bad encounters, but net positive, I would say.
  - onetokeoverthe 6mo ago
    [dead]
tadfisher 6mo ago
"Police used AI facial recognition to arrest a Tennessee woman for crimes committed in a state she says she’s never visited": https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/29/us/angela-lipps-ai-facial-recognition https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/29/us/angela-lipps-ai-facial-rec...
- jamiequint 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - tadfisher 6mo ago
    Your question was: > In what way do cameras make life harder for regular people? I provided an example. Are you only accepting peer-reviewed studies?
    - jamiequint 6mo ago
      Single example is worthless. Is there a pattern of this happening far more often? Overall, do fewer people get incorrectly arrested or detained as a result of this technology, or more.
      - turtlesdown11 6mo ago
        so where are your data sources arguing these are helping?
      - text0404 6mo ago
        Such great questions. Maybe we should answer them before building a massive, privately-owned, nationwide surveillance apparatus with taxpayer money.
        sigbottle 6mo ago
        No, we should build the massive, privately-owned, nationwide surveillance apparatus with taxpayer money! It's for science, after all! We have no data on whether or not cameras covering every square inch of space, hooked up to a centralized surveillance database is actually good for society. We need to conduct this methodologically and scientifically. We'll be able to come to an objective conclusion with enough testing!
array_key_first 6mo ago
There's zero proof anywhere that these devices do anything about crimes. How could they? A camera can't lock someone up.
- loeg 6mo ago
  They provide law enforcement timely information about the location of wanted (e.g., stolen) vehicles. Law enforcement can act on that information. If law enforcement does not have that information, it cannot act on it.
  - vjsrinivas 6mo ago
    These systems have provided incorrect data, and law enforcement often misuse that data to stalk, attack, and wrongfully arrest innocent people. Privacy matters to everyone - especially for ones who don't care about privacy.
  - array_key_first 6mo ago
    Law enforcement can act on that information, but they can do a lot of things. Whether they actually are is a different question. You're also ignoring the risk here. These devices open up a whooooole new class of mistakes that can be made. There have already been people wrongfully jailed due to surveillance technology.
MSFT_Edging 6mo ago
A few months ago a woman was harassed over a crime she did not commit, by a police officer using her vehicle driving in a large general area as proof she committed the crime. Officer demanded she admit to a crime she did not commit. Additionally, the surveillance apparatus enables parallel reconstruction. When law enforcement gathers evidence via illegal means, they can then use the drag net to find cause to detain/search unrelated to the original crime, in order to have cover to gather evidence they illegally gathered prior, aka a loophole for civil rights.
ikrenji 6mo ago
feels somewhat dystopian, no? the big brother is watching everywhere you go. no way this can go tits up
m3047 6mo ago
1) Surveillance needs to be reviewed. Even if reviewed by AI, eventually that reviewed work needs to be reviewed by a human if we're going to maintain the fiction / friction of "human in the loop". The "hits" will include false positives, unless the system is overtuned so that it rarely kicks an event. 1a) Review will take time / resources which could be spent on human policing, harming the community. 1b) Some jurisdictions may prefer "broken windows as policy", the notion that they can construct a "reasonable suspicion", given enough garbage (some of it outright garbage, the point being there is so much of it nobody cares; don't need to do an accurate drug test until trial, right?). 2) False surveillance hits will make it through human review and result in injury to innocent humans. 3) Police forces already lack the money / manpower to investigate potential crimes. 4) Police forces already "prioritize" other matters than the mentally ill setting their houses on fire or releasing plagues of rabbits into their neighborhoods (actual things that have happened to me!).
Vrondi 6mo ago
By mis-identifying them, leading to 5 months of jail time for a person who has done nothing other than be in public. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/30/us/north-dakota-facial-recognition-ai-errors-bank-fraud.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ZVA._9T2.xhw7_vuEoA60&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/30/us/north-dakota-facial-re...
text0404 6mo ago
Biased policing means these systems are used to target minorities, activists, and people with "controversial" beliefs: https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/discriminatory-profiling https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/discriminatory...
JuniperMesos 6mo ago
One of the services that is most underfunded is the service of arresting, trying, and incarcerating homeless people who commit petty thefts, vandalism, and in some extreme cases physical assault or even murder. Insofar as cameras drive down the cost to the legal system of gathering enough evidence to convict and incarcerate people who do these things, this would make life better for regular people.
- hackable_sand 6mo ago
  Jesus Christ dude...
teaearlgraycold 6mo ago
Police officers have on many occasion used these cameras to track people outside of the scope of their jobs. Usually it's a man tracking a woman (like an ex-wife, ex-girlfriend, or just a random stalking target).
pocksuppet 6mo ago
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, right?

ggoo 6mo ago

Surveillance tech can alter peoples behavior. I know I'm personally more stressed when I know I'm being filmed, even if I'm doing nothing wrong. https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2024/1/niae039/7920510?login=false https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2024/1/niae039/7920510?l...

jamiequint 6mo ago
Untrue at a population level, just compare anxiety disorders and self-reported anxiety between USA and China.
- qbit42 6mo ago
  There are certainly no other causal factors... I'm not saying that it couldn't be true, but we have no way of concluding that from just comparing such rates. There are many differences in daily life and thresholds for reporting beyond surveillance levels.
- Barrin92 6mo ago
  anxiety in the sense you're talking about is a function of private surveillance and in that regard America is much worse. State led surveillance in Chinese public spaces is real and effective in producing compliance (20 years ago public theft, pulling people off motorcycles was a daily occurrence) but in private China is a significantly freer society. Foucault used to distinguish between models of authority that operate on "make die and let live" vs "let die and make live". China's the former, the US with its moral busybodies both in progressive and religious flavors the latter. The US now is a society of public disorder and personal policing, China is a society of public order and largely indifference in private life. Of course the former creates anxiety. American Beauty, a film about permanent surveillance without any state, would make no sense in China.
- tokioyoyo 6mo ago
  I think it’s a cultural thing. On average, people seem to hate cops more in the USA. Personally I like having little cop boxes in 5 minute walking distances in Tokyo. There are people who are very against it, bring up bad encounters, but net positive, I would say.
- onetokeoverthe 6mo ago
  [dead]

tadfisher 6mo ago

"Police used AI facial recognition to arrest a Tennessee woman for crimes committed in a state she says she’s never visited": https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/29/us/angela-lipps-ai-facial-recognition https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/29/us/angela-lipps-ai-facial-rec...

jamiequint 6mo ago
[flagged]
- tadfisher 6mo ago
  Your question was: > In what way do cameras make life harder for regular people? I provided an example. Are you only accepting peer-reviewed studies?
  - jamiequint 6mo ago
    Single example is worthless. Is there a pattern of this happening far more often? Overall, do fewer people get incorrectly arrested or detained as a result of this technology, or more.
    - turtlesdown11 6mo ago
      so where are your data sources arguing these are helping?
    - text0404 6mo ago
      Such great questions. Maybe we should answer them before building a massive, privately-owned, nationwide surveillance apparatus with taxpayer money.
      - sigbottle 6mo ago
        No, we should build the massive, privately-owned, nationwide surveillance apparatus with taxpayer money! It's for science, after all! We have no data on whether or not cameras covering every square inch of space, hooked up to a centralized surveillance database is actually good for society. We need to conduct this methodologically and scientifically. We'll be able to come to an objective conclusion with enough testing!

array_key_first 6mo ago

There's zero proof anywhere that these devices do anything about crimes. How could they? A camera can't lock someone up.

loeg 6mo ago
They provide law enforcement timely information about the location of wanted (e.g., stolen) vehicles. Law enforcement can act on that information. If law enforcement does not have that information, it cannot act on it.
- vjsrinivas 6mo ago
  These systems have provided incorrect data, and law enforcement often misuse that data to stalk, attack, and wrongfully arrest innocent people. Privacy matters to everyone - especially for ones who don't care about privacy.
- array_key_first 6mo ago
  Law enforcement can act on that information, but they can do a lot of things. Whether they actually are is a different question. You're also ignoring the risk here. These devices open up a whooooole new class of mistakes that can be made. There have already been people wrongfully jailed due to surveillance technology.

MSFT_Edging 6mo ago

A few months ago a woman was harassed over a crime she did not commit, by a police officer using her vehicle driving in a large general area as proof she committed the crime. Officer demanded she admit to a crime she did not commit. Additionally, the surveillance apparatus enables parallel reconstruction. When law enforcement gathers evidence via illegal means, they can then use the drag net to find cause to detain/search unrelated to the original crime, in order to have cover to gather evidence they illegally gathered prior, aka a loophole for civil rights.

ikrenji 6mo ago

feels somewhat dystopian, no? the big brother is watching everywhere you go. no way this can go tits up

m3047 6mo ago

1) Surveillance needs to be reviewed. Even if reviewed by AI, eventually that reviewed work needs to be reviewed by a human if we're going to maintain the fiction / friction of "human in the loop". The "hits" will include false positives, unless the system is overtuned so that it rarely kicks an event. 1a) Review will take time / resources which could be spent on human policing, harming the community. 1b) Some jurisdictions may prefer "broken windows as policy", the notion that they can construct a "reasonable suspicion", given enough garbage (some of it outright garbage, the point being there is so much of it nobody cares; don't need to do an accurate drug test until trial, right?). 2) False surveillance hits will make it through human review and result in injury to innocent humans. 3) Police forces already lack the money / manpower to investigate potential crimes. 4) Police forces already "prioritize" other matters than the mentally ill setting their houses on fire or releasing plagues of rabbits into their neighborhoods (actual things that have happened to me!).

Vrondi 6mo ago

By mis-identifying them, leading to 5 months of jail time for a person who has done nothing other than be in public. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/30/us/north-dakota-facial-recognition-ai-errors-bank-fraud.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ZVA._9T2.xhw7_vuEoA60&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/30/us/north-dakota-facial-re...

text0404 6mo ago

Biased policing means these systems are used to target minorities, activists, and people with "controversial" beliefs: https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/discriminatory-profiling https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/discriminatory...

JuniperMesos 6mo ago

One of the services that is most underfunded is the service of arresting, trying, and incarcerating homeless people who commit petty thefts, vandalism, and in some extreme cases physical assault or even murder. Insofar as cameras drive down the cost to the legal system of gathering enough evidence to convict and incarcerate people who do these things, this would make life better for regular people.

hackable_sand 6mo ago
Jesus Christ dude...

teaearlgraycold 6mo ago

Police officers have on many occasion used these cameras to track people outside of the scope of their jobs. Usually it's a man tracking a woman (like an ex-wife, ex-girlfriend, or just a random stalking target).

pocksuppet 6mo ago

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, right?