People should be required to take medication that will control their behavior so that they act in accordance with the state's definition of a "good citizen." This, in addition to the monitoring (and possibly some conditioning sprinkled in), should have a lot more people saying "everybody's happy nowadays."
We could also let citizen patrols replace police. If you aren't a middle aged white guy with a gun, watch out: you're inherently suspicious and one false move, and you're done.
When I say citizen monitoring, I mean citizens monitoring other people via their cameras, check ins, and the like. We have trained a population of people to keep track of everything that goes on around them. We are watching everyone else all the time. And that is quite like how small towns used to operate. Everyone kept tabs on everyone else and if anyone got out of line, it became obvious immediately. It can be stifling, but it can also be handy for crime control. Back then people didn't lock their doors, they felt comfortable leaving the keys in their cars, and if kids ran into trouble, they could knock on the nearest door for help.
I think we're headed for massive private and citizen surveillance anyway. There's just too much data collection and citizen monitoring for it to go away. And there's too much money for companies to walk away from it. The debates in DC may attempt to define government's role in this, but corporations aren't going to walk away from being able to collect info on every person in the world. Sooner or later we'll all be carrying devices which monitor us at all time, and the companies have the ability to analyze that and predict what we will do. That will likely change the security industry and open doors for those companies to sell protection. And the potential market for commercial drones is too big for industry to back away from that. As has been pointed out in another post, Google Street View has been useful for monitoring what citizens in various countries are doing.
The extra double good Surveillance will not stop someone from killing others.They will do it anyways as they blow themselves up and know they will go to their Pig Stye in the Sky.
Here are your options.
1. You do nothing and let everyone have access to everyone.
2. You secure the hell out of every place you possibly can so that it becomes less possible to commit crime.
3. You profile better so that you prevent "suspicious" people from have the same freedom of access as other people.
Israeli air security is easy on most, intrusive for a few: "Israel's approach allows most travelers to pass through airport security with relative ease. But Israeli personnel do single out small numbers of passengers for extensive searches and screening, based on profiling methods that have so far been rejected in the United States, subjecting Arabs and, in some cases, other foreign nationals to an extensive screening that comes with a steep civil liberties price."
The reason I have participated in these discussions to such an extent is that I see a major disconnect between people complaining about government surveillance and companies boosting about data collection and all the nifty tools they have so people can record every aspect of their lives and those around them.
If privacy was truly an issue, we'd have companies more careful about privacy. But, no, they are selling our lives in a huge way. So I don't see that they are the least bit concerned about privacy.
There may be good reasons to argue against some or all of the things you listed, but "What did they prevent?" isn't one of them.
I agree. If people feel we need absolutely no security protections, why do we have locked apartment buildings, offices where you need to show an ID to get in, etc. There's always going to be an adjustment between doing too little and doing too much. I continue to raise the issue of what we will have if businesses and citizens take protection, security, and data collection into their own hands. Will that be better or worse than what we have now? Will we be safer? Will we get mob-run lynching?
There is a huge business opportunity in surveillance and data collections. It's happening with or without government. I think it is fine to debate what government can or cannot do, but don't let the focus on government misled you into thinking it isn't done by private enterprise, which will make a lot of money providing data and security to those who will pay for it.
The "plan" is that every citizen will have a camera and augmented reality and can collect data and do IDs on the spot. Want to know the history of everyone around you? It will be available.
Why Is Angry Birds Addictive? Helsinki Pitches to Be a ‘Neurogaming’ Hotspot - Tech Europe - WSJ: “'Connect Google glasses to a headset and you have a whole different beast. Imagine walking around a city with that on and seeing an overlay of how everyone around you is behaving in their minds. Are they relaxed, or stressed? And you could actually see that. Instead of seeing someone’s Facebook status, you could see information about what people’s minds are doing. There’s a lot you could do with that data.'”
Here you go. Just one example of a private company being able to monitor what is available to the public.
Boston Start-Up Buzzient Offers Social Data to Police on Explosives Chatter - NYTimes.com: "The holy grail would be something similar to what happened with the ricin letters that were sent to the White House: someone who has logged onto a forum, and has logged in with some identifying piece of information — a user name, an e-mail address — has asked particular questions, commented, maybe, on other posts. Someone who has, in effect, self-identified, where someone basically puts out enough information you could say, 'Oh, this person is kind of asking pretty much the same sorts of questions that correspond to what we found in the physical forensics.'"
You can get government out of the surveillance business, but citizens are doing it all the time now (to the extent that businesses are now trying to prevent them from monitoring farms, industrial accidents, etc.)
The FBI enlisted citizen help to find the bombers. At some point I imagine citizens will start monitoring everything themselves, with the positives and negatives that entails. There will be accurate and inaccurate identifications done in citizen forums and perhaps citizen justice (gotta get the NRA in there to protect us).
There will also be increased use of locked communities with private security. Businesses will continue to use their own security and for offices, require IDs to get in and out. Perhaps more public places (e.g., airports) will become private, so that only certain citizens have access to them.
This comment from VC and popular blogger Fred Wilson.
A VC: Evidence On Our Smartphones: "The rise of computers that we all carry with us everywhere, and their ability to capture what is going on around them, time stamp it, and geotag it, creates a ton of interesting opportunities. Including law enforcement opportunities. And I think that is a good thing."
Re: Re: Re: There's a Better Way to Book than what you suggest!
Never book flights on kayak.com.
It's probably been at least five years since I used Kayak to book any flights, but it seemed to provide links to quite a few sites to comparison shop. What's wrong with it?
These days I usually use Southwest and do book directly on the airline site. Between flying into airports most convenient for me, free bags, and no penalties if you cancel (you get a credit you can use within a year), it's the best airline for me.
Now this is something I hope generates a lot of interest here and elsewhere. One of the reasons so many citizens are opposed to fracking is that they don't know what is going on around them. The secrecy only reinforces their wariness. As fracking moves into heavily populated areas, next to homes, schools, parks, and the like, people are going to ask to know what risks there are.
It may also turn out that we'll see more crowdsourcing of government investigations.
A VC: Evidence On Our Smartphones: "The rise of computers that we all carry with us everywhere, and their ability to capture what is going on around them, time stamp it, and geotag it, creates a ton of interesting opportunities. Including law enforcement opportunities. And I think that is a good thing."
However if the Data is not public then the goverment has not right to it with a warrent(at least in the US and I would hope everywhere). The problem is when the government is snooping into data thats not private.
If the data is for sale, then the government or one of its contractors can purchase it the way companies do when they want access to personal data that has been collected on people. At some point the government is going to figure out it isn't worth the political hassle to pass laws to obtain this data. It will just use private contractors for everything.
The reason to demonize gov't is because they set up the rules to decide how much privacy to give us ...
Would you be in favor of having laws which limit what companies can collect about us, save, and sell or provide to partners? If the data isn't available, then it can't be handed over to the government.
The ability to draw on the massive stores of data that are now publicly available means that even seemingly trivial information, when cross-referenced with more of the same, can allow governments and others to create surprisingly detailed profiles of people that may have far from trivial consequences.
That's what I have been saying. This info is either already publicly available or can be purchased. Government has access to the same data lots of other people and companies do. Privacy is not a government issue. If the info is collected and made available in some form, then demonizing government over privacy strikes me as a dodge by these companies.
There's money to be made invading people's privacy. It isn't just a government issue.
Google Glass and the emerging Glasshole culture | ZDNet: "With Glass, because the device is being worn and there's no indication of when it is being used, one has to assume that the wearer is recording everyone all of the time."
Google Glass and the emerging Glasshole culture | ZDNet: "With Glass, because the device is being worn and there's no indication of when it is being used, one has to assume that the wearer is recording everyone all of the time."
so, i wonder how many of that 288 will get voted back into office next election? knowing the way we forgive and ignore everything that is used to shaft us, probably 289!!
This has never been a big issue to most voters so I don't think it will have much to do with who gets re-elected. Most voters are much more concerned about other issues and if they vote on the issues, the ones more important to them will sway their votes.
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Glenn Beck vs. The Citadel: Who Announced Plans for a Libertarian Commune Better?
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
We could also let citizen patrols replace police. If you aren't a middle aged white guy with a gun, watch out: you're inherently suspicious and one false move, and you're done.
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re:
Here are your options.
1. You do nothing and let everyone have access to everyone.
2. You secure the hell out of every place you possibly can so that it becomes less possible to commit crime.
3. You profile better so that you prevent "suspicious" people from have the same freedom of access as other people.
Israeli air security is easy on most, intrusive for a few: "Israel's approach allows most travelers to pass through airport security with relative ease. But Israeli personnel do single out small numbers of passengers for extensive searches and screening, based on profiling methods that have so far been rejected in the United States, subjecting Arabs and, in some cases, other foreign nationals to an extensive screening that comes with a steep civil liberties price."
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Prevention
If privacy was truly an issue, we'd have companies more careful about privacy. But, no, they are selling our lives in a huge way. So I don't see that they are the least bit concerned about privacy.
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Prevention
I agree. If people feel we need absolutely no security protections, why do we have locked apartment buildings, offices where you need to show an ID to get in, etc. There's always going to be an adjustment between doing too little and doing too much. I continue to raise the issue of what we will have if businesses and citizens take protection, security, and data collection into their own hands. Will that be better or worse than what we have now? Will we be safer? Will we get mob-run lynching?
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Re: Surveillance happens all the time now
The "plan" is that every citizen will have a camera and augmented reality and can collect data and do IDs on the spot. Want to know the history of everyone around you? It will be available.
Why Is Angry Birds Addictive? Helsinki Pitches to Be a ‘Neurogaming’ Hotspot - Tech Europe - WSJ: “'Connect Google glasses to a headset and you have a whole different beast. Imagine walking around a city with that on and seeing an overlay of how everyone around you is behaving in their minds. Are they relaxed, or stressed? And you could actually see that. Instead of seeing someone’s Facebook status, you could see information about what people’s minds are doing. There’s a lot you could do with that data.'”
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Re: Surveillance happens all the time now
Boston Start-Up Buzzient Offers Social Data to Police on Explosives Chatter - NYTimes.com: "The holy grail would be something similar to what happened with the ricin letters that were sent to the White House: someone who has logged onto a forum, and has logged in with some identifying piece of information — a user name, an e-mail address — has asked particular questions, commented, maybe, on other posts. Someone who has, in effect, self-identified, where someone basically puts out enough information you could say, 'Oh, this person is kind of asking pretty much the same sorts of questions that correspond to what we found in the physical forensics.'"
On the post: Former DHS Official Says Boston Bombing Proves ACLU & EFF Are Wrong About Surveillance And CISPA
Surveillance happens all the time now
The FBI enlisted citizen help to find the bombers. At some point I imagine citizens will start monitoring everything themselves, with the positives and negatives that entails. There will be accurate and inaccurate identifications done in citizen forums and perhaps citizen justice (gotta get the NRA in there to protect us).
There will also be increased use of locked communities with private security. Businesses will continue to use their own security and for offices, require IDs to get in and out. Perhaps more public places (e.g., airports) will become private, so that only certain citizens have access to them.
This comment from VC and popular blogger Fred Wilson.
A VC: Evidence On Our Smartphones: "The rise of computers that we all carry with us everywhere, and their ability to capture what is going on around them, time stamp it, and geotag it, creates a ton of interesting opportunities. Including law enforcement opportunities. And I think that is a good thing."
On the post: Flight Search Engines And The Multi-City Ripoff
Re: Re: Re: There's a Better Way to Book than what you suggest!
It's probably been at least five years since I used Kayak to book any flights, but it seemed to provide links to quite a few sites to comparison shop. What's wrong with it?
These days I usually use Southwest and do book directly on the airline site. Between flying into airports most convenient for me, free bags, and no penalties if you cancel (you get a credit you can use within a year), it's the best airline for me.
On the post: Why Public Interest Trumps Trade Secrecy
Ah, a subject I care about a lot
On the post: Lithuania And Estonia Use Google Maps Street View To Catch Tax Cheats
Re: Re: If its public data Its public data.
A VC: Evidence On Our Smartphones: "The rise of computers that we all carry with us everywhere, and their ability to capture what is going on around them, time stamp it, and geotag it, creates a ton of interesting opportunities. Including law enforcement opportunities. And I think that is a good thing."
On the post: Lithuania And Estonia Use Google Maps Street View To Catch Tax Cheats
Re: If its public data Its public data.
If the data is for sale, then the government or one of its contractors can purchase it the way companies do when they want access to personal data that has been collected on people. At some point the government is going to figure out it isn't worth the political hassle to pass laws to obtain this data. It will just use private contractors for everything.
On the post: Lithuania And Estonia Use Google Maps Street View To Catch Tax Cheats
Re: Re: My point
Would you be in favor of having laws which limit what companies can collect about us, save, and sell or provide to partners? If the data isn't available, then it can't be handed over to the government.
On the post: CISPA Passes The House, As 288 Representatives Don't Want To Protect Your Privacy
Re:
I'm curious. Why did you trust them before? Have you been sure how your personal info is being used?
On the post: Lithuania And Estonia Use Google Maps Street View To Catch Tax Cheats
My point
That's what I have been saying. This info is either already publicly available or can be purchased. Government has access to the same data lots of other people and companies do. Privacy is not a government issue. If the info is collected and made available in some form, then demonizing government over privacy strikes me as a dodge by these companies.
On the post: CISPA Passes The House, As 288 Representatives Don't Want To Protect Your Privacy
Re: Privacy is a thing of the past, sadly.
Google Glass and the emerging Glasshole culture | ZDNet: "With Glass, because the device is being worn and there's no indication of when it is being used, one has to assume that the wearer is recording everyone all of the time."
On the post: The Greatest Trick The Government Ever Pulled Was Convincing The Public The 'Hacker Threat' Exists
THIS is the issue
Google Glass and the emerging Glasshole culture | ZDNet: "With Glass, because the device is being worn and there's no indication of when it is being used, one has to assume that the wearer is recording everyone all of the time."
On the post: CISPA Passes The House, As 288 Representatives Don't Want To Protect Your Privacy
Re:
This has never been a big issue to most voters so I don't think it will have much to do with who gets re-elected. Most voters are much more concerned about other issues and if they vote on the issues, the ones more important to them will sway their votes.
Next >>