OPEN BAR: I see you've come to PD. I too like to live dangerously

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A link found through that link: http://www.kpho.com/video?clipId=10094988&autostart=true

Cops wearing cameras are more cautious about using force, go figure.

I can't remember if it was you, Roger, or someone else who recently concluded that the way to go is for EVERYONE to have a camera 24/7. I agree; if we're going to become a surveillance society, the power of surveillance needs to be equally distributed. among all citizens.

I don't remember saying that, but it makes sense.  I think the recent uptick in police violence isn't recent.  I think they're just getting caught more often.

Yeah, I suspect as much as well.

This.... This troubles me. Not so much the Police angle but rather the potential implications of everyone wearing a camera of some description all the fucking time and filming literally everything about everyone. The systems are not particularly hard to envisage, and internet access will be pretty much everywhere people live within a generation. Constant upload/storage is probably possible. What's the likely end result of anyone in a legal situation with this accessible? Doom unless wealthy.

There's something about this whole encompassing surveillance situation and how it fits perfectly with the prison pipelines that it's giving me the shits. Add to that it's the wet dream of any ruling government, anywhere. If it becomes accepted in the US, well, you're the world leaders in FREEDOM and I'm sure you'd be quite keen to export this new brand.

It's weird to imagine but I'm guessing there will be the usual mix of pros and cons associated with any big change. I read a quote recently to the effect of - when there's no more privacy, we'll all have to become a lot more tolerant. Makes a lot of sense to me, when I imagine a level playing field - everyone knowing everything about me is a scary thought but then I know everything about all of them, too.

Hard to imagine but I reckon it's headed our way, regardless. Might as well make the most of it.

Yeah, I think that in many ways the takeaway is that change is happening, and it's how we deal with it that will make all the difference.

[Junkenstein]

Player Piano: no, will add to the list.

Still shuddering somewhat. I have serious concerns that this "no more privacy" thing means exactly that for, say, you or I. How about your local government official? Latest famous person? Already exceedingly wealthy and famous person? Billionaire who you've never heard of?

I really don't see this as being anything more than a system of control with each of us actively enforcing it. I can realistically see court situations where you're testifying against your accomplice whether you want to or not. You are your own walking evidence that can be used against you or anyone else as appropriate at a certain point.

I'm struggling to see the removal of privacy having an end result of increased tolerance as well. I'd say it's more likely the result would be increased judgement and obsession with social status. For reference in this field, see Facebook.

[Cain]

A link found through that link: http://www.kpho.com/video?clipId=10094988&autostart=true

Cops wearing cameras are more cautious about using force, go figure.

I can't remember if it was you, Roger, or someone else who recently concluded that the way to go is for EVERYONE to have a camera 24/7. I agree; if we're going to become a surveillance society, the power of surveillance needs to be equally distributed. among all citizens.

I don't remember saying that, but it makes sense.  I think the recent uptick in police violence isn't recent.  I think they're just getting caught more often.

Yeah, I suspect as much as well.

This.... This troubles me. Not so much the Police angle but rather the potential implications of everyone wearing a camera of some description all the fucking time and filming literally everything about everyone. The systems are not particularly hard to envisage, and internet access will be pretty much everywhere people live within a generation. Constant upload/storage is probably possible. What's the likely end result of anyone in a legal situation with this accessible? Doom unless wealthy.

There's something about this whole encompassing surveillance situation and how it fits perfectly with the prison pipelines that it's giving me the shits. Add to that it's the wet dream of any ruling government, anywhere. If it becomes accepted in the US, well, you're the world leaders in FREEDOM and I'm sure you'd be quite keen to export this new brand.

I can see it working...but not in the kind of society we currently live in.

In the current social situation, full spectrum surveillance will be deployed first and foremost against the general population, in the name of counter-terrorism.  Y'know, the kind of thing we've recently discovered is ubiquitous.  Incidental counter-surveillance will take place against agents of the government, but only those forces most likely to be encountered on a day-to-day basis, and will likely be outlawed - requiring social media to generate any response.  In those countries where banning social media is not already a frequently used option (see: Turkey banning Twitter and Youtube).

Furthermore, attempts will be made by the NSA and others to crack the security on features like Google Glass and similar products, assuming backdoors are not already installed or faulty security practices are used in creating their encryption systems.  Meaning even the tools available to the general public may end up being used against them.

I've seen initial studies which show police do tend to behave better when they are made to wear a camera (with associated penalties for deactivation), or even when colleagues are simply made to wear a camera.  A more general argument for mandatory cameras for government officials and employees, to circumvent abuses, could be made.  But it'd have to come along with guarantees on people's personal security and freedom which simply no government is currently willing to seriously endorse.

[Cain]

Bleh.  Pretty sure I need to buy a new Kindle.

I mean, they're not super expensive.  But bleh.

[minuspace]

It's not not like I'd ban Facebook and YouTube, just discourage them.

[Cain]

So would I, to be honest.

I mean, they are pretty terrible.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I can see it working...but not in the kind of society we currently live in.

In the current social situation, full spectrum surveillance will be deployed first and foremost against the general population, in the name of counter-terrorism.  Y'know, the kind of thing we've recently discovered is ubiquitous.  Incidental counter-surveillance will take place against agents of the government, but only those forces most likely to be encountered on a day-to-day basis, and will likely be outlawed - requiring social media to generate any response.  In those countries where banning social media is not already a frequently used option (see: Turkey banning Twitter and Youtube).

Furthermore, attempts will be made by the NSA and others to crack the security on features like Google Glass and similar products, assuming backdoors are not already installed or faulty security practices are used in creating their encryption systems.  Meaning even the tools available to the general public may end up being used against them.

I've seen initial studies which show police do tend to behave better when they are made to wear a camera (with associated penalties for deactivation), or even when colleagues are simply made to wear a camera.  A more general argument for mandatory cameras for government officials and employees, to circumvent abuses, could be made.  But it'd have to come along with guarantees on people's personal security and freedom which simply no government is currently willing to seriously endorse.

This is the crux of the matter. For it to work, society has to shift dramatically. Disruptive technologies are coming hard and fast, now. A potential black swan in every box. Meanwhile, homo sapiens, running OS and networking protocols that haven't really been upgraded much in the last couple of millennia, are finding it increasingly difficult to adapt to this.

Like it or not, we are a technological species, hurtling along a path of convergence. Computation used to be a separate room, then it was personal, then it was portable, most recently mobile and now it's just become wearable. It's getting harder and harder to pretend that this shit isn't part of us - an extension of us. Regardless of how hard this fiction is to maintain, most of us are still trying our damnedest 

[EK WAFFLR]

The fuck happened with everyone becoming me?

[Reginald Ret]

The fuck happened with everyone becoming me?

?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The fuck happened with everyone becoming me?

Your Belgian magic, it is rubbing off on us.

[Cain]

Just remembered a student of mine left his Kindle behind when he went back to Krygyzstan, and it's been gathering dust in my drawer ever since.

So I've charged it, regged it in my name and now downloading my previous book collection.  Ah, it has been far too long.

[LMNO]

WHAT YOU KILL IS WHAT YOU KEEP.  THAT IS THE NECROMONGER WAY.
                                        \

[Cain]

I'm pretty sure I payed the iron price.

[LMNO]

 

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

I have to write something making fun of a bunch of idiots in Tuscon for thinking they can overthrow the government. Any recommendations for how to describe Tuscon in the letter would be appreciated