13 ms·
I think this is our future, whether it's dystopian or not. Technology is eventually going to make it impossible to really prevent "Persistent aerial surveillan
by msane 11y ago
I think this is our future, whether it's dystopian or not.
Technology is eventually going to make it impossible to really prevent "Persistent aerial surveillance". What requires an expensive small blimp today might become the size of a ping pong ball (or wide area flock of them) and come out of a 3D printer tomorrow.
So who will be using such tech? Governments and private entities alike - we can try to legislate against either but technology will probably overpower the legislation quickly.
So what is the impact of this sort of technology? Maybe it's not all George Orwell. Your bike was stolen on Third St at 1pm? Roll the video back or forwards to know exactly where the thief is. Someone shot up a nightclub and rushed out in a crowd? automated video analysis caught them.
Yes it sounds scary if it were a monopolized power, but eventually I don't think government will be able to hold monopoly on it.
- SomeStupidPoint 11y agoI think it sounds scary anyway. I mean, I'd know everything about you -- where you lived, where you shopped, where you worked, where you ate out, where your friends lived, what you did with your friends, when you did it, etc. I could even get further than you might imagine: I probably have a really good guess (>0.99) what you do at your work, given your activities outside of work and the people you associate with. I tell your boss when you lie about being sick, I tell your insurance how often you do risky things when not driving, I tell your ex where she can find you at the club. This is the future you're presenting, and claiming that there's some upside. On the contrary, I think humans can't handle it, and are literally going to drive themselves insane with machines.
- msane 11y agoI sort of agree, but it just seems technology is going that way one way or the other. How could it be stopped? When/if that sort of tech happens culture would be very different to say the least.
- davnicwil 11y agoI agree that some of the possibilities of such tech are scary. However, putting on my optimist hat, they are only possibilities. Of course it will be possible to do such things. The question then becomes: why would anyone do them, and (somewhat linked) what are the chances that anyone will do them to you? > I tell your boss when you lie about being sick, I tell your insurance how often you do risky things when not driving, I tell your ex where she can find you at the club. All of these things were possible 50 years ago. They are possible now. They will be possible in 50 years. Increasingly advanced technology reduces the amount of effort, and to some extent, the prior knowledge about you required to do these things - but that doesn't automatically make them more likely to happen. For the vast majority of people the motivation to do such things remains extremely low relative to the motivation to do other more interesting things. > I mean, I'd know everything about you -- where you lived, where you shopped, where you worked, where you ate out, where your friends lived, what you did with your friends, when you did it, etc. Again, this is not far off being trivial with today's technology. Yet you can't imagine (at least I can't) what benefit or pleasure anybody would get out of knowing such information about a person today. Therefore it's extremely unlikely anyone will care enough to do it - evidenced by the fact that practically nobody does. Why will this change in the future? Taken to the extreme, ask yourself even if you could retrieve this information about any given person instantly, for zero cost or effort, would you even care enough to do it? Are the things you could do with that information more exciting or interesting than what you were otherwise going to do today? For how many people is that answer going to be yes?
- clord 11y ago> The question then becomes: why would anyone do them, and (somewhat linked) what are the chances that anyone will do them to you? Let me rephrase the items from the GP comment: 1. A company that your boss hires will tell him when you lie about being sick. 2. Your insurance company pays to find out how often you do risky things when not driving 3. where-is-she.com charges 29.99 per month to report on someone's location at any time, using open drone surveillance data. The point is, all of this can be turned into businesses and government services. In my opinion it's damned scary. I like Snowden's remarks on the topic: > Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.
- marincounty 11y agoI believe this surveillance can be slowed down? We need to stop being so complacent with our photo being taken? We could start be not shopping at stores like Home Depot. Home Depot takes my photo multiple times for the purchase of a screw? I know all stores treat their employees and customers like convicted felons, but some are worse than others? Then, maybe we could slow down on the posting of pictures? Show up at local town hall meetings--questioning the need for so many cams, and license plate readers? Especially, if said town doesn't have a problem with crime?
- happyscrappy 11y agoThat seems like a lot of effort just to keep your apocalyptic narrative alive.
- logfromblammo 11y agoArgument based on reason and ethical principles is not how politics works.
- sasvari 11y agonot only in that context worth a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age
- msane 11y agoAbsolutely
- Symmetry 11y agoYou think people can't handle it but it's actually pretty close to the way most people lived before urbanization brought anonymity to the masses. Now, technological changes might eliminate privacy which would be unprecedented but it's anonymity that's historically weird, not its lack.
- verbin217 11y agoAnonymity sure. We're talking about privacy. It's always been at least non-zero available.
- tonyhb 11y agoLive in a faraday cage. I'm only semi-joking; I think that it could be a solution to your issue if you're that concerned about it. Whatever the outcome technology is going to be persistently ubiquitous.
- mirimir 11y agoThat's not necessary. Also, lack of emissions would attract attention, and so be counterproductive. But using shielded equipment in a shielded room, that would be prudent for private work.
- nitrogen 11y agoIt was always possible to hide or leave town. Plus people forget.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoPeople for the first million years, lived in one anothers pockets. There was no anonymity. Arguably we're designed to be social because of that. The modern tendency toward outbursts of antisocial behavior might be a product of anonymity.
- pavel_lishin 11y agoWhat sort of "outbursts of antisocial behavior" are you talking about, and is there really a modern tendency towards it?
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoOh anything really. Ranting on HN. Telling off sales clerks. Pushing to the head of the subway line. Anything you get away with because its anonymous. In the old days, you'd know every clerk, everybody in a line, and get harassed if you were antisocial.
- nitrogen 11y agoYou'd also be harassed if you deviated from any social norms, had the wrong religion/skin/... We should not want to return to such times.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoThat's very much a modern view. And not shared around the world at all. Racism is of course wrong. But social norms are the glue that holds us all together, to a degree. Its not black-and-white.
- Terr_ 11y ago... So what? First, it's apples-to-oranges, because we lived in smaller groups. Second, our cultural-programming changes at a much faster rate than genetic-programming.
- 11y ago
- Gustomaximus 11y agoGiven you and most people reading this very likely carry a phone in your pocket that can track most of above fairly well, its already been here for years. I like the benefits of my phone despite the potential for abuse. Challenges of advancement is nothing new for humans. Just like when cave men discovered how to make fire. It's incredibly beneficial when used well. It's incredibly harmful if used without control.
- joshuapants 11y agoIt's also probably a lot easier to capture a ping pong ball than a blimp. Then you'll have people reverse-engineering them and figuring out countermeasures. It'll be illegal, of course, but someone will have a way to defeat them and probably use it.
- jessaustin 11y agoA flying ping-pong ball I find in my house, is mine to do with as I will. I expect courts eventually will find that dominion to extend to some elevation above my backyard as well.
- nitrogen 11y agoSharper cameras, higher flights...
- slg 11y agoDoesn't it sound scarier if the government doesn't hold a monopoly on it? At least the government is [supposed to be] held to some standard of use. I think that type of technology and data being available to the general public at large is frightening.
- revscat 11y agoIt's scary because the US government has such a history of suppressing dissenting ideas, especially when it comes to anti-war activists, environmental activists, or any domestic groups which express opposition to the United States' form of capitalism. The FBI has a long history of infiltrating and undermining such groups. I understand what you're saying, but it also means that many possibly beneficial ideas and/or movements tend to not see the light of day.
- rhino369 11y agoIf the government wanted to stomp out dissent, it wouldn't take aerial surveillance. People loudly and openly dissent under their real name with no consequences. Wanting to outlaw any technology that could conceivably be used against you is silly.
- beamatronic 11y ago"Roll the video back or forwards to know exactly where the thief is." This is happening collaboratively today on Nextdoor.com when there is a crime in the neighborhood. "What does your camera show, Mr. Neighbor, at such-and-such time and date?"
- msandford 11y agoThankfully that all happens manually and requires people to cooperate with one another. The FBI requires no such cooperation.
- underbluewaters 11y ago"we can try to legislate against either but technology will probably overpower the legislation quickly" Technology is here to serve us. What's with this attitude that we don't have the tools (laws) to control what our government and people are and aren't allowed to do? It's like the good ideas of small government and libertarianism have been warped mean that laws are no longer the solution to anything.
- msane 11y agoLaws are great. Laws against use of information technology are pretty troublesome to enforce. Are you thinking of a law against building or operating drones? Or a law against using open source software which controls swarms of drones or stores video? Or a law against advanced 3D printers? I hear distributing copyrighted music is illegal...
- crucialfelix 11y agoAnd then after that everything will simply be recorded. Human activity prior to this point in time will be considered kind of "pre-historical".
- shas3 11y agoEverything you mentioned has been possible for several years now: with eyewitnesses, ubiquitous CCTVs, etc. The change will really be in that clearance rates on crimes will shoot upwards when these technologies are invented. Or criminals will find ways around the technology, as they have done for much of human history. The bigger concern is the possibility of misuse and abuse of such technology, both by the government and by unscrupulous individuals. That is what will make the future dystopian. In fact it has been happening for many years now: think lie detectors and cell phone tower tracking- both demonstrably bullshit, but widely abused nevertheless!
- maxxxxx 11y agoI think it will be a monopoly for people/organizations who have the necessary money. And they will probably create rules that prevents others from getting information. So we will have some information have's and a lot of have nots.
- canvia 11y agoThere was an interesting recent book that covers a lot of privacy vs technology concepts that are increasingly relevant. I'd highly recommend checking it out. It's a quick read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Circle_%28Eggers_novel%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Circle_%28Eggers_novel%29