RE: Mass Camera Surveillance Can Take Down Statism - NUTS! CRAZY! Or is it?
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.