Patriots taking care of Flock cameras.
(youtu.be)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (20)
sorted by:
I am older and the future is always a problem. But I am old enough to understand that certain vaguely fearful futures are not feasible, and neurosis is not a basis for public policy...to solve a "problem" that violates no one's rights.
And, like any good doctor, I understand that it is better to treat the cause of a problem, than to treat its supposed symptoms.
It's the will west right now,we just have to trust these fuktards then?
Do you mean "wild west"? No, it's not really the Wild West. We trust the police with firearms. That's potentially more dangerous to our rights than a stupid camera that cannot see around corners. That is why it is important for police agencies to be independently responsible to the public, not to governance. Work the problem that needs to be worked, not get distracted by video toys.
The more relevant point is that there is no need to entertain a shapeless and nameless fear. Run the numbers. Nobody can afford the huge army required to put every person under continuous surveillance. And for what? If somebody wanted to sit on you, they would pluck out an operative, have him sit in a car across from your house to keep an eye on you, following you if you went anywhere. This is 19th century detective work. And you couldn't do a thing about it. But we don't fear it. Instead we fear a brainless piece of electronics that records an endless spool of boredom, mainly useful to investigate burglaries and fires and miscellaneous mayhem.
I'm not for or against but I can tell you that AI models can scan thousands of frames per second and flag up anyone who appears to be holding a cellphone while driving, for instance. Then the onus is on you to prove that you were actually holding a candy bar, or whatever.
The AI can scan oodles of images, and conclude what? A cellphone while driving is pretty penny-ante. But you would be in the wrong, so what is the injustice? How would that be any different from a traffic cop seeing it? It wouldn't be any different, and you would be in traffic court anyway, explaining your point of view. So, the example goes nowhere. It just recreates the same situation with organic eyeballs instead of electronic ones.
I've gotten nailed by traffic cameras that catch my license plate and speed, and I have been in the wrong (not meaning to be, but that doesn't count). So, I pay the fine, and remember where that spot is. Life goes on. I don't lose a second of sleep over the question of being "tracked." There is no possibility I was in the right on exceeding the speed limit near a school. Sometimes, you just have to suck up the possibility of being caught in an infraction.
I disagree they have so much money,they toss it at projects like this and see how it works out.
Money means nothing to them.
And it's probably all our money.
One more way to make us poor.
They have enough money to pick out individuals and hound them by low-tech means. They don't have the manpower (much less the money) to monitor everyone in a nation of 350 million people. I can run through the numbers again, since no one here seems interested in or capable of doing it, but the result falls in a vale between impossible and infeasible.
Why do you accept that you would allow things to get to the point of absolute tyranny? You don't plan on doing something NOW to prevent that? (Flock cameras are not in any way essential to tyranny. But when vandals get caught and shot, the vandalism will be less appealing. You don't really understand how a tyranny works. They don't have to worry about "how it looks.")