Mass Camera Surveillance Can Take Down Statism - NUTS! CRAZY! Or is it?steemCreated with Sketch.

in #politics3 years ago (edited)

Does that seem crazy to you? Bare with me. If we think about why people want a government and are afraid to live without one, maybe we could find other ways to make government obsolete, at least in some respects like the big issues of security and protection. Open public access mass camera surveillance is one way to head in that direction.

People want a government to protect them via police, and have other agencies to take care of things in society. Anything funded through tax-payer money is part of the federal government apparatus in some way, but the jobs that are 100% tax-payer funded are the core of what is part of the government. This ranges from judges, police, and other government institutions like NSA, Homeland, FBI, CIA, to some lawyers, construction workers and other areas like nurses and doctors.

Depending on the country there are various ways that tax money is spent by the governmental agencies. Focusing back on surveillance, this relates to security technology. Technology can be a great ally in a decentralized manner, or used against us by centralized authority to keep us under their thumb. Surveillance cameras are for security, and the state likes to have cameras and other surveillance to spy in on it's own citizens and other citizens of the world.

Centralized authority like police are often corrupt and abuse their authority and power. Many are even supposed to wear body cameras but often conveniently turn them off as they engage in violating the rights of others they are meant to protect as part of their job. Police and the government have access to so-called public surveillance cameras, but the public doesn't have access to them, only specific groups of individuals can gain access based on their jobs.

In some cases cameras end up mysteriously not working, or footage goes missing. The police often investigate themselves and most of the time clear officers of all charges of wrongdoing. Police officers even get paid leave while their crimes are swept under the rug.

How to eliminate most of the "security" forces that are hired to allegedly protect us, their corruption, abuse of power, etc? What if we could use that technology to surveil, for our greater benefit as a decentralized open society that was more self-governing and responsible?

Instead of using the centralized authority using the technology behind closed doors were only they have access, imagine if surveillance was a public open access technology. Instead of the police and government only having the eyes to watch themselves and everyone else, we would flip the switch on them where we would be the ones watching them and ourselves.

When people are being watched, and they know that they are being watched, they are much more careful about doing something that could get them in trouble. This is especially true for cameras that record, as opposed to simply eyeballs and unreliable witness accounts.

Total surveillance in public places with complete public access would allow anyone to go verify any crime that has been alleged to have been committed. Rather than rely on eyewitness accounts, or on the trust, faith, loyalty and belief in the honest authority and power of security forces like police, the whole population would become a self policing force. Rather than abdicating our personal responsibility to be eternally vigilant for our own safety and the safety of others around us, we would take up that responsibility.

Rather than the government and police acting as a mass surveillance state and watchmen, we would become our own watchers and witness the disintegration of the centralized authorities surveillance state.

Need proof of a crime committed? It will likely be seen and heard on camera. The government will not be able to abuse the surveillance by hunting for good people that the government lies about and portrays as bad, like in the Jason Bourne movies for example, or in whistleblower cases. Just go look at how the surveillance state has been used to spy on people and suppress truth from getting out, like in the Watergate scandal.

In no way do I support this for centralized authority or limited access. Everyone must be able to access surveillance to verify what wrongs were done and validate the forces that bring people to justice for their wrongs. These forces don't need to be hired, but can be a group of people in the area. Local citizens acting to stop violence against others. The ideal is not hired people, but people who care to unite and do what's right to stop the wrong, as a community in common-unity.

The real force for security needs to come from a community itself that will watch each other's backs and help others when wrongs are done against someone. That is where this ultimately needs to head to. Why pay people to sit around waiting to handle a crime, when crime will be so low? Why pay people to do what we should all be willing to do to help others out, as we would want to be helped if we were in their situation? It's truly our responsibility in our own local communities to watch over, guard and protect ourselves/each other.

People have fear of crimes being committed and the bad people getting away with it. Public open access surveillance reduces those problems, possibly to non-existence at some point down the road, as we develop more and more responsibility to deal with the issues in our own communities, leading us to become more self-governing and decentralized, and lessening the physical or psychological dependence on centralized authority.

I see open public surveillance as a key to ending statism. It's where we use technology to make our lives safer together, not surveilled through a centralized authority. If crime occurs, we can find out more about it and verify that you local or larger justice system is being honest. We can all know the evidence, not have it secretly presented in a court room away from the eyes of the public.

I really see technology and cameras everywhere as great potential to end statism. Yes, there are issues, like being able to know where anyone is at anytime I suppose, tracking people from one place to another. Spying is still there, true. But that doesn't increase the risk of someone harming you, because there are cameras to catch them, where they came from, where they went. People could report crimes as soon as they happen, watching live feeds. Catching bad people would be easier. Exonerating innocent people would be easier. While we still have security forces, private or public, we can watch them and make sure they don't abuse their power.

Hand-held cameras make great for security when being pulled over by police, or in protests, as a record of what happened. Instead of someone uploading their video to youtube or whatnot for everyone to see what happened, the public cameras would be accessible to anyone anytime. We can protect ourselves so much better this way!

If private citizens and companies can use cameras to protect themselves on their property, then we as a society should be able to as well. And that means not a centralized authority, but us actually having the tools like technology to do it, where we are all held accountable for our actions. Anyone can verify the evidence about what happened on camera, not just the police, courts, government or other authoritarian groups that have access the rest of us don't!

Public open surveillance can totally change the game. We can flip the switch and turn the tables to use technology to our advantage against the state, rather then the state against us. The technology will pressure people into more self-control. As we become more self-governing and responsible in self-control, there is less crime and less of a need for any security forces to stop crimes since we don't engage in them as much. Statism's hold on security, and the mass appeal for the state to provide it, will fade.


Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.


If you appreciate and value the content, please consider:
Upvoting ,    Sharing or   Reblogging below.

Follow me for more content to come!


Please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page; or just click on the upvote button if I am in the top 50

Sort:  

One of the worst things about the NSA is that we, the people, do not have access to any of that. Like a person who has subpoenaed NSA for his phone metadata that would clear him in a court case. (The NSA has ignored it)

Anything you say can and will be used against you...
AGAINST you. Not we will bring all of your testimony to court, if it helps you or hurts you. No, its we will use your words against you.

How can we believe in "for our protection" when they are clearly against it?

Anything you say can and will be used against you...
AGAINST you. Not we will bring all of your testimony to court, if it helps you or hurts you. No, its we will use your words against you.

Indeed, well said. We need equal access to information, freely, openly, public access. That's how I see the future. That will create trust among people, as I see it. You can trust people to not harm you. It will make things better.

Yes, it is decentralized surveillance done by individuals. Combine residential and business security cameras that record public spaces and the streets around them with everyone having smart phones, and we create a web of protection.

As I mentioned below, I posted about this in the past. I would not share a link to one of my posts if it were not directly related, so I hope you do not mind the link.

I am a residential security expert and PI, and your post above is directly related to the work I do. I want to help people secure their neighborhoods and to make them safer. Imagine how much less crime there would be if the neighborhood watch signs were replaced with signs that said, "Smile, you're on camera!"

Upvoted, followed, and resteemed! It's a pleasure to meet another professional working on furthering a great idea.

Imagine how much less crime there would be if the neighborhood watch signs were replaced with signs that said, "Smile, you're on camera!"

Damn straight. We all can do this, and the government has no say about it. Community growth efforts to change from the ground, up. I followed you as well ;) Thanks for the feedback.

Podesta was recently spotted in Florida.

Yeh right dude...

I am unsure what your reply is in response to, or how to take it. Not enough information there.

I am aware at this point that all attempts to try and right the proverbial ship are futile within our government. However, when this one inevitably implodes we will always be in need of good ideas throughout society for the next attempt whenever that may be. As the author says the surveillance state will not be disappearing while technology exist so why not turn it against itself? Politicians and all government officials, in any capacity, need be fitted with pin cameras on the lapel all day everyday with a constant stream to public domains. If you want to record every aspect of our lives then we want constant access to yours while were paying you at the very least. If they want to have shady dealings with banks and companies (aka fascism) it will be publicised or you can do it on your own personal time during the night...with the neighborhood camera thats already in place showing who is coming and going during the night.

Yeah, the government needs to have body cams as part of being paid for rendering services that are there for our good and ensure their daily dealings are above board. Many jobs are pretty useless we would find out, with so much wasted time, or non essentials tasks. Thanks for the feedback :)

I love it when an idea is turned on its head...

I'll have to think through the privacy implications of this, but given the choice of having surveillance in the hands of an evil central authority vs. a decentralized, open to everyone mechanism... the choice is obvious.

😄😇😄

@creatr

As long as the cameras are recording public areas and are under the control of private businesses and individuals, they are in our benefit to have them. :)

Yeah, it might suck to play it as a dichotomy of choices, but essentially it's a good way of looking at it: a small group vs. everyone having access to public data.

Just imagine if this was the case on 9/11, How all that brainwashing would have been wasted from the first moment. We all would have live feeds from thousands of different cameras and angles as it all went down. I heard the Pentagon alone had some 900 high res cameras recording just about all areas that day. How many peope would have downloaded the last 1/2 hr from all feeds while the SHTF ? Same on every floor and stairway in the twin towers.
I've suggested on previous blogs that all people working for public funds should be periscoped live while at work. Many positions would fade away in minutes through outrage of public, or just resignations knowing the game is over.
Good thoughtful post my friend :-)

Just imagine if this was the case on 9/11, How all that brainwashing would have been wasted from the first moment. We all would have live feeds from thousands of different cameras and angles as it all went down.

Exactly! Hehe.

Yeah, all public jobs should be monitored. The more power, the more monitoring. Watch how long we tolerate their lazy asses lol. So many useless jobs and waste of money out there.

Exactly, the attrition would be so fast their heads would spin LOL

I also had a Meme Dream.... !

Life is Good

ah stupendous fascinating dream there :)

We would also see the people working their asses off too, and make sure they are paid right :-)
There are a few LOL
Cheers

There were countless videos of the Pentagon event, but the FBI confiscated them all. Funny how that works, ehh? They wouldn't want people seeing a plane fly away after all.

are you shitting me? Probably had a good excuse for that! We want to leave the Authority to the authorities, and let your favorite TV news tell you what happened and how to think about it. Now we return you to " The Simpsons " good night :-)

haha, ignorance is strength! ;-)

Your post really spur something in me. I think I might already had that idea before. I'm glad Dan also felt the same about it too. I actually send your post to other people because I wanted it to trend and so I'm glad to see it trend.

As a physical security professional and PI, I've been recommending this for years. Every business for example has a security system already. How much more would it cost to have them add street facing cameras if they don't already have them?

Each street would then have hundreds of privately owned and separate systems to watch public areas. There's no easy way for that evidence to disappear, it is decentralized, and it is owned by individuals, not the government. The idea was shared in one of my original posts too.

Interesting post. I think a lot of us could use camera on our body, like the governmental mafia do with their "peacekeepers".

That reminds me of Cody Drummond's app Peacekeeper. It was a competitor to Virgil's Cell 411. I was backing Cody's project, but it did not allow you to build your own network. You were limited to just the other people near you. It was also pro-government.

We are the peacekeepers. We are the militia. We are the ones who are supposed to "police" our neighborhoods. The more local the defensive force, the better off the people there will be too. You knew this all already though. :)

I'm fully behind Dan's idea of creating replacements to the tyrannical systems around us. Make them obsolete. Walk away from them. We are doing that here with Steemit, and we should also do it with apps like Cell 411, being our own First Responders, and rebuilding the militia.

I heard about Peacekeeper in the past. I never heard about Cell 411. I'll check it out.

I was always very thrilled by Peacekeeper. I didn't knew they were pro-gov.

I think we'll see some sort of Peacekeeper app fusion with Steem or EOS at some point, at least I'd really love to see it tried.

I know Virgil, the CEO and founder of Cell 411, and he's a fellow Liberty Professional and friend of liberty. I highly recommend that app for everyone.

It is very useful no matter where you are in the world. Build your networks, and use the app to protect yourself. I'm trying to get Virgil to join Steemit. He's over on FascistBook mostly these days.

Sweet, thanks for the support :) My work has been to evolve consciousness for people to learn to think better, and change the way we live. But since people aren't too keen on that, then we can use technology to pressure the change, as long as its decentralized and open to public, not a centralized control grid :P

The idea is ingenious, the only hurdle I see is with storage.
Then there's these:
http://www.opentopia.com/hiddencam.php
http://www.earthcam.com/

and other repositories exist of webcams.

Cool I've seen some of those before, thanks. Yes storage is an issue if the event is to be recalled. Maybe 24h, or a week, could be done? It would take a lot of resources for sure, start with the most crime related areas and cover what can be with the limits we have.

With enough cameras around a neighborhood though, you can imagine how police will feel if everyone has access to the system, not just useless but watched. What if people find that there is hardly any crime and mostly just cops fucking with people traveling in their cars, they could tell the cops to fuck of out of the neighborhood, or town, or city, and maybe come together and hire someone local who's interested in investigating and reporting to crimes.

The goal is to make them obsolete. We don't need them. We certainly do not need double standards and special protections. A lot of police abuse would have gone unreported too if it were not for people recording.

Yup. It can be a huge game changer.

Excellent point! I have long been saying that this technology will continue to burgeon, until it is not only the public that have no privacy, but those that most abuse their wealth and power.

I'm all for public surveillance, out of all the desperate measure that needs to be taken to eliminate crime these days, this one is actually more subtle. PS. I have just voted for you as a Witness, thanks for the good work! Please keep any eye open for me along the way, much love @sweetpea

Sweet! Thanks, you sweet pea :P

have you here about LIBERLAND ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberland

Yes I have, when the land was first claimed. Has it developed well?

I'm not sure, I have not read anything about it for a long time. But the concept and idea is interesting.

I signed up for the project but have not invested anything into it. The location is not a good one in my opinion. Eastern Europe in a swampy completely undeveloped area doesn't sound ideal depending on how bad things get in the world. Panama on the other hand looks very promising.

imagine if surveillance was a public open access technology.
yup...good idea. All surveillance cameras upload to the blockchain.
David Brin wrote a book about it a long time ago, BEFORE the blockchain.
I don't agree with everything that he says, but it's something to think about.
Transparent Society

Most security system surveillance setups use DVR's that overwrite automatically after so many days depending on your data capacity. It is not stored on other people's servers on the Internet. You control the data. If something bad happens, you stop the overwrite and offload the specific data needed.

It would be very easy to do since existing systems are already in use. The additional cost would maybe be a couple more outside cameras, but that's not much considering the safety and benefits the system owner would receive.

Edit: I have heard of businesses NOT wanting outside cameras however since it can cause them to be involved in criminal and civil cases that they would rather avoid. Still, the benefits outweigh the negatives in my opinion. Of course I'm biased in favor of improving personal security however!

that was then. This is now. cameras are CHEAP.
so is wifi

Exactly! Even the fancy entrance porch light replacement camera systems are under 200 bucks and super easy to install. They have all sorts of awesome features to beyond protecting you.

My advice would be to have several many inexpensive cameras that upload constantly to the cloud.
Even one in your sunglasses.

One thing I don't like about this is it has onboard memory. I'd rather it go to the cloud automatically.
I'd also just as soon there were no indicators that anyone else could tell if it's recording.

These are gen-1 I imagine....better stuff is no doubt on the way.

There are lots of apps that auto backup video and pictures. Cell 411 for example has a near instant video option. Ustream does something similar. It's best to overt and covert options at the same time. Just be careful how they are used. They need to be used in public, and different states have different laws.

if someone is doing something in my presence they KNOW that I am watching them do it. Assume recording.

Yep! It is best to assume you are being recorded when you are in public because you probably are. :)

Yeah, that's too much bloat for today's tech though lol. Maybe a few locations, but damn would that cost a lot to host lol. Thanks for the feedback.

I dunno how I missed that one! I thought I had read everything David Brin ever wrote.

Thanks for schooling me yet again =)

Edit: I just read through the provided synopsis, and was struck by how many predictions Brin makes that have either already come true, or are in the process of coming true.

The last bit I found quite enlightening:

"A Withering Away?: Activists have revived an old dream — of an era without nations or major governments. It may happen, but not in a manner that idealists expect."

I had no idea Brin was an advocate of anarchy, but he and I agree on this (and much more). States are simply becoming obsolete, and as they do, while they presently seem to be gobbling every resource in the world, people simply use better means of making decisions and financing improvements.

For example, @drpuffnstuff wanted to fund a library that advertised Steemit. I built it, populated it with books, and installed it.

installed.jpg

We don't need no stinkin' badges!

I absolutely LOVE this idea. I've thought of it many years in the past.

The footage needs to be open access, this is essential. Need it run efficiently so everyone can view without bandwidth limitations. Private companies would crop up to secure us or review footage; even Volunteers in different communities could review or take donations or pay to solve crimes and/or public issues that can be viewed/reviewed on camera archived footage.

It's vital to limit this to public spaces however; though It would be beneficial for any private business to also voluntarily provide their footage to maintain a consistent stream of things happening (for example think of criminals ducking into private businesses so their camera trail goes dead; especially malls where there would be multiple entries and exit points)

Yeah. It could also be a network of nodes, where each person who has video set up can set access to feeds, on request when there is a crime, or if you join this network, a crime report in an area will automatically allow access to a certain time period of video from all cameras in that area that are part of the crime area. This as an option for those who don't support the mass access to anyone to spy on people. Maybe there would be issues with validating the crime in order to open access to the video. Thanks for the feedback.

Even better. Decentralized and desperate individual ownership but as a whole contributing to the pool of footage.

Now I'm wondering, this just popped in my head, as technology improves, how hard it could be at some point int he future to distinguish false or artificially created or altered videos because computer generated graphics are only going to become more realistic and harder to distinguish from the real live action recordings.

Yeah, have you seen the imitation technology that can mimic your face/mouth onto Obama or anyone, and it looks like they are talking?

Yes I agree with the presence of surveillance cameras
Catching bad guys will be easier. Releasing innocent people will be easier. At least we take the positive thing @krnel hahaha

Indeed :)

Thats a good but bould tought, who knows what can fix this mess :P thanks for sharing you toughts
(I think you misspell one of the tags)

You're welcome. Haha, yeah, thanks for letting me know :) Booboo in tag department.

Theoretically, this is an idea that would probably work.

But it also opens the door to more abuse by all kinds of non-government parties. The second you step outside your home, you would be visible to the whole world to see. Our privacy is already quite low and something like this would make it even lower. Stalking somebody will become even easier. And I'm sure corporations and marketing agencies would quickly find a way to leverage the huge treasure trove of information that this would create and find a way to abuse it.

Still, I keep in mind that my objection might be based on the fact that I grew up in a world with a much higher level of privacy than today's and thus I'm not ready to accept yet another technological invasion into that. But it is quite possible that people that are used to having a camera in their (and every other) pocket, wouldn't mind constantly being filmed as much as I do. And they might see more of a positive side. For instance, if you witness something cool and random, you would be able to watch, keep and share the tape. And they might care about that more.

Oh yeah, it's a huge treasure trove for marketing to target people and learn about habits. I am suspicious like you, healthy paranoia, but I think the way to a more trusting "trustless-technology" based accountability is important to get people free from being dependent on what a centralized authority or media says is "real".

I don't like being filmed, but I would accept this as a beneficial directions towards freeing humanity. None of this would be required if we all learned how to think and recognize right from wrong and learn more about how to figure that out as we live. If people understood how to live without government in anarchy then rules could be upheld because they wanted to. But people aren't there. So I think technology can help bring us to a better place, or maybe it won't and we're fucked. lol.

It's always safe to assume we are fucked even if it's going to be just partially :P It's not only our paranoia and attachment to privacy (reasonable or unreasonable as they might be), it's also the fact that the authorities are not too likely to relinquish that power that easily. Whatever the technology, I'm sure the government would do its best to stay in control of it for both self-serving and possibly legitimate reasons.

But despite my partially irrational attitude and knee-jerk reaction to this idea, I can in no way deny it's utility in achieving the goal you have proposed for it. Sure, it will have side-effects, but its potential effectiveness is out of the question, at least in my book.

The systems would be privately and separately controlled however. I would not recommend the systems be networked together in any way. Most systems should be DVR too and the data kept off the Internet. With a setup like that, stalking is not an issue.

I don't think that that's what krnel is proposing and I don't think that is going to work. Privately controlled is by no means a panacea. If the access to this data is open for some and restricted for others, than you still get the exact same problem and abuse of authority that you get now. You just move it from the government to corporations and other private investors. And their motivation to be in this business would be to earn the most money out of it and this system doesn't have many good revenue streams unless you start selling people's data or practicing other kinds of abuse of your position.

Open for some and restricted for others? The data belongs to the people who own the cameras. If you have a camera running on your porch, that data is yours. A community of houses has porch cameras on every door. How would that be a bad thing? Packages would not be stolen, cars would not be rummaged through, etc.

Yep, wasn't thinking of that particular angle. I agree, this actually makes sense and has a lot less of the privacy/stalking problem.

Who is watching the watchers?
We should.
The population, however, is kept busy with survival - paying taxes, laboring 8-5 and mow their lawns...

The government will take care of us.
Yeah....

The concept of decentralization of power and concentration of responsibility on individuals - all individuals - it is a concept of voluntarism - good Anarchy. I wrote an article about it a couple of weeks ago.

Excellent write-up!

Thank you, and thanks for the feedback. Yes, proper anarchy, of no masters or rulers, not no rules lol.

This is an awesome tool for moving in the direction you speak of :

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.safearx.cell41

Absolutely, great app to rely on each other more than centralized authority :)

The link does not work, but I'm guessing it was for Cell 411? I highly recommend everyone use that app.

Yep, the nsa needs to be open sourced.

Then the panopticon works for everybody rather than the select few.

Panopticon, long time sinc I heard that used. Open source the world!

I agree, between the panopticon and the blockchain criminals are in for a hard time.
Looks like it might do in liars, too.

Begin new law request in the house. Support will be tremendous. I vote YES. Great post!! use blockchain and make it an app!

That's a big blokchain! lol

Extraordinary post, it's natural that you get a lot of votes if you post this up apparently, I also give upvote even though this does not affect compared to the upvote by other steemit whales.
This is very amazing, and thank you for sharing. Visit also my blog @sitimunawarah

Thanks for the support nonetheless :)

Great article. Gets you thinking for sure. Yeah anymore it seems like we are damned either way. Having cameras and being watched can help and can hurt. It's a two edged sword. For the most part it seems like we have to have them to protect our rights and just in general protect us. Where do we draw the line though?

It's either we learn to think better, and learn more truth, moral truth, evolve consciousness... which so far is taking thousands and thousands of years of moving back and forth. Or we cheat and use technology to pressure us into changing towards that better way we could have voluntarily evolved towards if we willed ourselves to care more for truth and moral truth. I've done and keep doing the former. But trying to get other people to catalyze into a deeper care for truth... has not been working well for me, or other people in human history. So, technology can get us to self-control and that conditions a greater well-intentioned society as generations go forward.

We are far better off with them than without them. If we allow the current setup to continue where most surveillance is done by and controlled by the government, we will be screwed by it over and over. It is not there to help us. We need our own decentralized and privately controlled surveillance systems to counter the government ones.

True! Guess we have to protect ourselves or be overtaken.

I just finished watching C-Span in relation to AI machine learning psychological analysis. The speaker mentioned how the NSA isn't secure. Also, he concluded that we no longer live in a world of privacy.

Yeah, we might as well head int he direction we are going, but properly with decentralized security, not centralized authority to do it.

all this cameras makes us more paranoiac and destroy a little our freedom, because truly we are not free, someone control us.

Social pressure of people watching you making you control yourself, is different than government authority watching you and criminalizing things that aren't crimes.

His writing is very good. I am happy with this paper and it is very useful for me. Read your writing as if I have just been hit by heavy rain after a very long dry season. My greetings from Aceh; @fahrilzubir.........

Thanks :)

It's an interesting concept.

But I have to wonder about the potential for abuse.

CGI (is that still the correct term) is getting better and better and what's to prevent someone from broadcasting a completely fabricated event for all the world to see and pass judgement based upon it?

How do you prevent someone from creating a virtual "invisibility cloak" that blacks out all surveillance in an area?

Dealing with issues at a community level is a good idea.

Let's see how Steemit ultimately deals with the abuse that occurs here first, then see where it can go from there.

You need to form communities based on common understanding, then spread that way of being outwards. Steemit is too divided and not localized in reality to affect the potential for change we hope. Having access to a feed doesn't mean you can tamper with it. IT security in the tech side to protect the cameras is also important. Thanks for the feedback.

You need to form communities based on common understanding

I agree on that 100%, I think that's what our culture is lacking most in, the sense of community that comes from understanding.

CGI is a serious issue. That concern is resolved however with the proper solution.

A street has 100 businesses on it with 100 different and separate security systems recording to privately controlled, not networked, DVR. Something bad happens on that street. Are all 100 separate systems going to be CGI altered? That's highly unlikely.

Cameras are not just regular visual light either. The person would have to fool infrared, thermal, low light, and regular cameras. They would also have to fool systems not based on cameras (magnetic, motion, temp, etc.) as well.

Speaking of communities, I believe you've seen my post about this, @theblindsquirl. It is directly related to this post, or I wouldn't be sharing it here. :) Thanks!

It still seems to me like people are far too willing to give up any right to privacy for the illusion of security.

We have privacy in a public place? Inside your home, sure, but on the street and in the play ground down the road? My children are playing there. I'd rather have cameras and people watching them for their safety.

I have said for some time that we will not be able to stop technology from advancing and doing the things it can, so to protect ourselves from the abuses technology can make available we MUST! take back control of our government. We are supposed to be a self governing people, protected from governmental abuse by the limits placed on our government by the US Constitution. We want the benefits of technology, but we are scared to death of the way an overly powerful central authority could abuse it and do us harm. So, the fight shouldn't be to prevent the thing we want, but to dismantle the thing that frightens us.

I'm not sure I am completely in line with the idea of open public surveillance, but I like the thought that went into this, and philosophy of relying on ourselves while denying sustenance to bloated, abusive government.

An interesting concept, but it would ultimately allow stalkers to have a field day.

Devils advocate - Police generally require security clearance and training in order to control surveillance technology. If it becomes decentralised then surely dangerous criminals could potentially use it with bad intentions?

Yes, it would be open for all mischief, but it's monitored so they are less likely to succeed or attempt.

I respectfully disagree. Police do not require security clearances and training to have your own surveillance system. Private individuals and businesses can and do own them. Stalkers cannot use a decentralized system that is split up at the individual and business level. We'd have millions of different surveillance systems all spread apart on different networks and with different data storage.

For example my home has street facing and entrance cameras. That's perfectly legal. It's in the public, and my cameras do not point into anyone's bedroom.

Free at the cost of .....????

Being in the UK one of the most watched countries. Im really worried about CCTV and that its not used to "protect" us more like control us

Money can be used to control us too. Take the power away from them, and make the tool work for us. Use cameras to make us protected from government :)

With enough cameras around a neighborhood though, you can imagine how police will feel if everyone has access to the system, not just useless but watched. What if people find that there is hardly any crime and mostly just cops fucking with people traveling in their cars, they could tell the cops to fuck of out of the neighborhood, or town, or city, and maybe come together and hire someone local who's interested in investigating and reporting to crimes.
thanks for sharing 😊 @krnel

Yeah, the cops will be the most suspicious activity lol.

I fully support the notion of all of use being able to access that surveillance any time we want (instead of a privileged few watching us while remaining themselves unseen) On the logistical level, I must say, I worry about storage.

Yeah, storage is like the #1 issue in terms of tech.

I live in Taipei, Taiwan where total surveillance has been a reality going back to 2001 at least. Total surveillance has messed up the psyche here in a HUGE way. Everybody here is nuts more or less. People here are unconsciously consumed with not making mistakes or doing stupid things in public, in front of the cameras, and with laughing at those who do make mistakes.

Yeah, mean-"spirited"-intentioned people can abuse the access to everything.

I really found this article funny, no not because of your ideas, but you see you are saying these cameras can be used to practically destroy statism, look I live in a city called La Ceiba, in Honduras a few years back the city government put surveillance cameras all over town, made a big investment on them, eventually as we are a very crime ridden country, this includes a lot of murders, well one happened right in front of one of the cameras, so the police demanded the municipality to hand over the film, it turns out the cameras were just the box there was nothing inside. So your idea might work somewhere, not here though, cameras won't film anything cause they don't really exist.

Philly is like that. They have police "boxes" on street corners with blue flashing lights on top of them even. If the camera detects a crime, it flashes and sounds an alarm. Criminals ignore them.

This isn't for a government controlled system however. Individuals would use them as a type of neighborhood watch instead. When you, as a criminal, drive into my neighborhood, you had better have a mask on and disguise your car the entire time.

If you did that, people would immediately call the cops though. As long as you are peaceful then, you are fine but being recorded. If a crime is committed, the people in the community have your vehicle information and the pictures of all the criminals. It would help a lot.

That does sound like a cool idea, but wouldn't be better if there was less spying and maybe when they hired police they would only get the best of the best, and put some in tough training to show their true colors. I know they go through some hard training, but I don't like the idea of government spying on citizens and our government spying on other peoples countries..idk just me. Thanks for posting, very interesting

Yes, well the idea is to liberate us from centralized authority by assuming the responsibility in our own lives instead. Governments can put people down with the police force when the gov't do wrongs. Putting the power of protecting ourselves back in our hands means we can make the government behave better while it still exists. The state isn't going away anytime soon, and won't go away in an instant either. All minds would need to change to understand how to live without it.

I think all cameras trained on the public should be removed. I don't want to give up my freedom for a little safety. I'm paraphrasing Franklin.

Just bring down the price of personal body cameras. This way you can eliminate the need for a watcher, unless it's a jury.

Stringing up the downtown area with cameras will just push the criminals out into the suburbs and country. Place your cameras on your own person and property. Freedom is not and never will be a surveillance state. Regardless of the voyeur

Some form of "Peace Officer," will always be needed. Policing the public is wrong, even electronically.

Yeah I like that. If you got out, turn on a personal camera and it records what happens. The state can still confiscate it like they do with similar devices like phones. Policing the public is what police officers do. The goal is to bring that responsibility back to ourselves so that we are empowered into more freedom. I like the body cam ideas, less efficient but more easily adopted by those willing.

I agree it does dampen the freedom to not be recorded hehe. Thanks for the feedback.

"I think all cameras trained on the public should be removed."

That will not happen. It doesn't matter what we think.

"Just bring down the price of personal body cameras."

That is happening. The price of all cameras is dropping, almost as quickly as their size, and improvements in quality.

The military is now using the living eyes of flying insects as the lens of cameras inserted into them when they pupate, and controlling them with joysticks. Not very long ago, this was impossible, no matter what price you would be willing to pay.

Soon, far smaller cameras will be networked live on the net, and windborne, penetrating every crevice in the world. There is no recovering our lost privacy, but the march of technology will level the playing field, and those that depend on secrecy for their profits, like corrupt politicians and murderers, will no longer be able to continue their predatory business.

"Some form of "Peace Officer," will always be needed."

Why?

Peace officers come in handy when the neighbors are target practicing at 2 AM. I really don't want to pack my piece over and tell them to stop disturbing the my peace.

The elderly can't take matters into their own hands against 4 twenty year old's stealing their lawnmower. The whole idea of an elected peace officer was to keep the peace.

Now about the cameras going up on all four corners of every overpass and intersection. They can stuff those. Yeah, they may have the technology to use insect size drones, but using them to fleece people's wallets for traffic violations by openly infringing on the right to privacy? It's just like wiretapping. Yes they could always do it, but could they use it in a court to remove a persons freedom without a warrant? I feel the same way about video surveillance.

Private citizens and businesses can place cameras up like decorating a Christmas tree. That's their right, but the government doing it and admitting to it, then using it to harass and jail the people is wrong.

Everything can be faked on voice and video now. They should never have that power in the first place. It belongs in the hands of the people.

LOL I am all too familiar with neighbors target practicing during the wee hours. Since just pointing out, in a friendly way, that I work for a living and need to sleep, has never failed to produce the desired quiet, I've never needed to call military forces in to enforce my will.

You make a profound point regarding the elderly, and those otherwise not physically able to enforce their personal peace. While Peace Officers are indeed intended to serve that need, they have clearly been subverted by parties interested in imposing their will on the community, rather than sticking to their knitting.

I reckon this is the way of government. Family and neighbors are less subvertible, and I recommend good neighbors over mercenary forces.

As to whether gummint has any authority to surveil the public, it doesn't matter anymore. Yes, it's wrong, and they shouldn't do it. Do you expect them to stop?

Me neither.

Technology keeps making cameras cheaper, smaller, and better. Our cell phones are a great equalizer. How many cell phone videos have you watched that alerted you to some crime committed by jackbooted thugs?

25 years ago the number was zero. 25 years from now, I think the ubiquity of cameras hot linked to the net will make corruption either impossible, or extremely difficult, and even more dangerous to the corrupt.

Whether we want it to happen or not, the sun will shine, the Earth will spin, and (if we're lucky) we'll get older. The power to surveill will inevitably get into the hands of the people, because there is no way to stop it from happening.

Maybe we'll get lucky before it just isn't avoidable any more, and some enterprising politicians will make it happen sooner. Couldn't happen soon enough for me.

That's what this would be though. You'd have cameras in three places:

  1. On your person (smart phone or otherwise)
  2. On your private house
  3. On your private business

We are being watched and controlled now.

other way, we pay tax for make them watching us.. it is a bad thing i had..

We can all contribute locally to maintain our community tech, and network it with everyone.

Very good article to read.like it.thanks

Useful post !
👍👍👍👍

How about less surveillance all around? I can't get excited about an idea that involves mass surveillance, regardless of who is doing it.

Then lets educate people towards understanding how to think better, and to care to learn more about quality truths about the world and ourselves, and about moral truth. Not enough people have been working to get that goal achieved so we can live in greater freedom and peace. It's been ongoing for thousands of years, yet few care to willfully devote themselves to caring for truth and learning how to live in truer and less falser ways so we can actually unite on the knowledge of morality rather than be divided from ignorance.

Congratulations! This post has been upvoted (100%) and reestem from the new curation trail @animus,
The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows and creating a social network. It's a completely free and you can join https://streemian.com/profile/curationtrail/trailing/691 or delegate steem power (SP) to @animus

Excelente información.

Blindspots: bathrooms or hospitals. Man I want to atleast be able to pick my nose when I walk down the street without wondering if someone I know is watching me. Privacy or Transparency or Professionalism, cant make up my mind.

Still blindspots indeed. You can't be charged for the rime of nose picking lol.

Everyone does it! haha

Congratulations @krnel!
Your post was mentioned in the hit parade in the following category:

  • Pending payout - Ranked 4 with $ 330,56

The problem with idea is that you are basically burning down the entire forest to tr ground to prevent future forest fires

(Disclaimer to analogy, yes I am aware that when a forest hasn't had a fire in a while, a controlled fire will be lit to prevent a later more dangerous natural fire. That's not what I was talking about...

God, the fact that I have to qualify this quick point with that paragraph is so annoying, but I can guarantee that would be the first response here)

this is a step to so called IRF chip.... they will sabotage it and implement the IRF chip. if that happen we are like in the movie "THE MATRIX".

hi @krnel
i never see pkst like that you put a long time to wite it i can see tgat !!wow so prety!

Similar to Steve Mann's idea of sousveillance.

Congratulations for your excellent post, I invite you to follow us and we grow faster, greetings

Every new phenomena has its advantages and disadvantages!

Hello! I just upvoted you! I help new Steemit members! Upvote this comment and follow me! i will upvote your future posts! To any other visitor, upvote this post also to receive free UpVotes from me! Happy SteemIt!

Great idea. Congrats!

the post is very interesting .thanks for uploading it

Nice post! Well written . Keep up the good work.I follow you.Do not forget to vote in my post. Thank you.

Wow, i need this in my country... There is a lot of insecurity here. Greetings from Venezuela @krnel

So the problem with mass surveillance is the fact that only some people (authority) have access to the surveillance footage; the solution to that problem involves (a) full video coverage of all public spaces, and (b) making the surveillance footage accessible to everyone, rather than just authority/state.

Some people would be okay with the idea of being recorded anytime they go in public... the author of this article, several of the commenters for example. They see the trade-off being acceptable. However, there are those of us who don't see it as an acceptable trade-off, and do not wish to be recorded everywhere they go. Your arguments aren't good enough to convince us.

Now, here's the question: in order to implement this, you're going to have to force it upon those of us who object. But I thought this was a solution to statist tyranny. Wouldn't you say being forced into going along with something like this is a form of statist tyranny?

Your arguments aren't good enough to convince us.

OK. Those of us who do want to set up cameras in private places for security, as we are, can continue to do so, and network with each other to provide access when crimes are created, allowing access to the areas cameras whent hey agree to join that network. No access is open for view without a crime existing in the area. That would be a restricted way of doing it that would still allow everyone to verify criminal reports.

Now, here's the question: in order to implement this, you're going to have to force it upon those of us who object.

That was your assumption. You think I'm a statist :P You made your own straw man and confused yourself. Peace.

Dude, it's not about calling you a statist or any stupid label. Its about a contradiction in what you were advocating for, vs. what the stated goals are. I read that you advocated for total public surveillance, and that total surveillance is OK so long as everyone has open access to the footage. However, my gripe is that if not everyone wants total public surveillance, then you have to force it upon those who don't in order to achieve what you're advocating for. And now you're "moving the goalpost", suddenly advocating for a private-only system, with restricted access, and then accusing me of building a straw man!

This is a good idea. Since we unfortunately are under surveillance, all of us should have access to the footage. Also, cops should undergo just as much training and psychological assessments as firefighters. Lives are in their hands. Let's give them more training, more assessments, and higher bars. And this idea, everyone can access surveillance footage.

the post is very interesting

 3 years ago Reveal Comment