Privacy advocates resign over facial recognition plans
Rayzer at riseup.net
Tue Aug 11 13:37:27 PDT 2015
On 08/11/2015 12:49 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
> So what do people think of David Brin's "transparent society" approach
> to this problem? We can't completely stop ourselves from being
> watched, but we can make use of all this technology ourselves. Police
> have ALPRs and dashcams and bodycams, but by and large they have
> actually resisted expansions of their own surveillance because they
> want the flexibility to be able to make up justifications after the
> fact. Phone cams have for the most part taken that choice away from
> them. The result seems likely to be less police abuse than at any
> point since at least the early 20th century in the US.
> Even Snowden's leaks were enabled by very similar technologies to what
> the NSA deploys against us.
> Is there any reason to believe that, overall, technology will benefit
> governments more than it does individuals?
The government gets 'first shot' at it because they finance and
'oversee' the development of the technology. They have the advantage.
In the case of bodycams on cops, one state is already making it more
difficult for defense lawyers to use the footage, and in the long run
the states MAY start developng laws that limit civilians from photo or
video documenting police 'activities' because 'the police are
documenting themselves' and you, PROLE, are interfering with their
> "They've got the guns but we've got the numbers. Gonna win, gonna take
> it over c'mon!" -Jim Morrison, Five to One
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the cypherpunks