>> -Your medical data is private, whereas this is a discussion about data from >the public sphere, where there is no legal expectation of privacy. > >Maybe ther

>> -Your medical data is private, whereas this is a discussion about data from >the public sphere, where there is no legal expectation of privacy. > >Maybe there should be? There is in other parts of the world. I strenuously object. But that's not this conversation. It's way upstream, as the SCOTUS has already decided that there is no public expectation of privacy. >> -Randos can already observe your every movement, They just have to do it >physically. A stalker can already follow a woman's public movements. A robber >can already stake out a house. > >Doing that in person is a much different thing in terms of commitment compared >to doing it from the comfort of your couch, or hell, having an AI model do it >for you and send you a nice notification. A rando can send a drone or a fleet of drones to do the same surveillance that you are worried about here. Perhaps you are just really anti-drone? >> I would prefer public data available to all, rather than a one-sided >panopticon. With the former, at least we can watch the watchmen. > >I would rather limit access to a power that can - at least theoretically - be >changed democratically, instead of having an infinite-sided panopticon. There is no such thing as an infinite-sided panopticon. Definitionally, a panopticon is one-sided.