> >LMAO. Keep preaching surveillance technofascism Jim, you're doing a great job.
>
>> It's too bad you cannot figure out what other people can.  Yes, it is certainly correct to point out that a given technology can probably be employed both to help and hurt freedom, but that's only relevant if you only approach the question qualitatively, not quantitatively.  Yes, a camera can be used by a cop to photograph a perp, or by a citizen to photograph a cop.  But is that merely the only relevant issue?  I don't think so.  They don't cancel themselves out, if you factor in the number of incidents that might be photographed.
>
>>  But the public probably needs to see hundreds, or even thousands of similar incidents, but they don't, and that's mostly because it's mostly just random chance that a camera would be pointed in the right direction at the right time.  However, the technology mostly already exists to allow people to take a continuous, 360-degree panorama of a protest.  Will it see misconduct by rioters, even looters?  Sure.  But it will also show misconduct by cops, of a kind and extent that most protestors will want to see photographed.
>
>> I suggest that most protestors will welcome this kind of technology.