Support NeoGAF

[Version 3.0]

Obviously a great system for solving crimes, but the potential for abuse is sky high (pun intended).

For argument's sake, let me ask this: if I did a kickstarter to run a system identical to this, but make the information publicly available, do you think law enforcement would object?

 

[radios shipping overview]

Well, it's already happening in this thread.

It already happened in Eastern Europe during the later years of the Soviet Union's influence.

You simply can't trust average people, especially local government or police types, with this kind of information or power. It will be abused. Those types of organizations already have enough problems with transparency (as we already see with this system), ethics, and militarization.

 

[Jeels]

It already happened in Eastern Europe during the later years of the Soviet Union's influence.

You simply can't trust average people, especially local government or police types, with this kind of information or power. It will be abused. Those types of organizations already have enough problems with transparency (as we already see with this system), ethics, and militarization.

Can you give a concrete example of how people in Baltimore are not able to act (within the law) or think freely because of this?

Are you also against CCTVs?

 

[radios shipping overview]

Can you give a concrete example of how people in Baltimore are not able to act (within the law) or think freely because of this?

Are you also against CCTVs?

In other words, if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about?

 

[Jeels]

In other words, if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about?

I don't really have anything to say to that, you didn't address my question.

 

[radios shipping overview]

I don't really have anything to say to that, you didn't address my question.

The issue is not whether people are able to act or think freely. The issue is whether the wealth of information available would be used to construct narratives to suit agendas, against individuals or communities. Having so much information would allow the people who possess it to use only the parts of it they need to put someone away falsely, act against political opponents (or political movements), or to drum up revenue by prosecuting petty or insignificant offenses.

 

[Mental Atrophy]

There's two separate active threads on this. Can we pick one, please?

 

[Walpurgis]

This would be incredibly useful technologies for governments stuck in a civil war/insurgency. There are certainly risks like if the government is evil then this would make it that much harder for rebels to bring them down. But this would be really helpful against terrorists. I wouldn't want this in my city though. The huge loss of privacy is not worth the negligible increase in safety.

 

[Jeels]

The issue is not whether people are able to act or think freely. The issue is whether the wealth of information available would be used to construct narratives to suit agendas, against individuals or communities. Having so much information would allow the people who possess it to use only the parts of it they need to put someone away falsely, act against political opponents (or political movements), or to drum up revenue by prosecuting petty or insignificant offenses.

I see your perspective now. Thanks for clarifying. But are you okay with CCTVs? The reason I asked that is because I don't see how this is any different from CCTV, which is used a lot for crime investigations and for giving lots of places a sense of security. This is just CCTV flying around. So where do we draw the line?