You make a point, but perhaps not the one you intended. It is pretty easy to track any one individual if the desire exists with existing technology. What it is harder to do is to track from a particular crime back to the perpetrator. So we have the worst of both worlds, no privacy and limited ability to track criminals. If somebody wants to track you specifically there are other ways to do it. This technology is essentially for the opposite.
I think it has to help preventing crimes knowing you are being watched. Not all crimes of course but it has to deter some crimes of opportunity knowing ring cameras are watching. Of course we still have videos of porch pirates but that doesn't mean a number have been prevented by the mere presence of a watchful eye. Not supporting or opposing the eye in the sky issue just a casual observation.
I think all the surveillance has made people even more on edge about crime and being victimized. It doesn't foster a feeling of safety or security, it fosters a threat assessment mentality, for whatever minimal deterrence factor it provides.
Most crimes are committed by criminals. You arrest the criminals crime goes down. Also as more criminals are arrested the more people think twice about engaging in criminal acts in the first place.
Loss of freedom and liberty always starts with a sliver, and always starts with voluntary compliance. Just a little at a time. Before you know it…..BAM! …. Some fatty is watching you take a shit in your neighbors pool.
I feel like that example isn't a good selling point against the eye in the sky. So many questions about that example. Why are you shitting in your neighbors pool? Is this a bad thing to catch someone shitting in someone else's pool? Is this a common euphemism that I missed ? Weird
They do commit crime though, its just policed in a very different fashion and with way more ambivalence. 50,000 new street cops vs. 50,000 new IRS agents, lets see how those things go over.
My initial thought was Nope, Do Not Want. After reading the article, it's more benign that I could have imagined. When demonstrations occurred last summer, the surveillance planes flew overhead in Baltimore, watching people, protests, and police from above. The planes captured footage of 32 square miles, with individuals represented as a single pixel. The ACLU’s Ms. Gorski says the technology is “capable of subjecting every square inch of the city to constant recording.” But under the program detectives could request the aerial surveillance footage only after a crime had been committed. No distinguishing characteristics, like a person’s race or gender, can be identified from the footage, said Michael Harrison, the city’s police commissioner, last year. The moving dots are tracked to and from a crime scene and the footage is used in conjunction with other ground-based security cameras, license-plate readers, and gunfire locators as a tool to help solve crimes. It’s not yet clear whether the program is more effective at solving crimes than policing methods that were already in place. The Baltimore police reported 390 armed robberies from May 1 to July 31 last year. According to the same report, confirmed by the Rand Corp., a nonpartisan research institution hired to evaluate the program, fewer than a fourth of those robberies were committed during the day, when the planes were operating. An even smaller number were actually recorded by the aerial cameras. I don't like the thought of more cameras watching us. What starts as individuals represented as a single pixel, will eventually lead to higher and higher resolution, imo. Is it a waste of money? Sounds like it. Will the 1033 program will have unarmed predator drones flying over a city near you? We are surveilled enough.
Sounds very UNFAIR. Criminal types in red flyover states and counties would not get the same surveillance and per capita they’re the worst. Especially as it pertains to violent crimes. They should all be incarcerated - just to be safe
Some won't be happy until the government is arresting people for thinking about doing something wrong. Ala Minority Report.
And this is how fascist states arise even in democracy. Poorly educated, easily led, bigoted and afraid people pave the way. Now where do I see that in the US today?
Just a thought Let’s ad this to the new AI that is advancing at a rapid pace.. what on earth could go wrong? Add in the robot dogs being used on the battlefield( and some have had guns outfitted to their backs ) Hmmm I ve seen this movie… and unfortunately all of its sequels and the tv series….
Fail on several counts. 1) we’d most like to emulate the Scandinavian states. Finnish people are ridiculously happy. 2) The populace in most Western European nations are not poorly educated, easily led and afraid nor highly surveilled. Got to keep an eye on Britain though they made a doc drama about them called “V is for Vengeance”.
