"Michael S. Lorrey" wrote:
> I plan on busting police camera systems for as long as I can. Doesn't mean I
> won't use camera systems for my own security system on my own property. If Spike
> or Zero tries to do any eavesdropping, they're gonna get their chips emped.
Dont worry Mike, my ideal is entirely *voluntary* surveillance {except, I suppose,
for criminals, who would be watched against their will.} Your comment regarding
increased vigilantism, etc, caused me to wonder how many deviants there are
in society. I would suspect not that many, and we could reserve a big state like
Nevada that stays free of surveillance.
Regarding the prudish causing headaches, The prudish would find themselves
marginalized in a transparent society. Who would want them in charge of
anything? Furthermore, my notion of surveillance and transparency
has nothing to do with what is done in ones home. I acknowledge the possibility
of bug-borne cameras, but even I am against those. I would consider
it a worthwhile pursuit figure ways to defeat such devices.
U-surv in public places only, kinda like what they are doing in London. People
are not free if they must fear thugs. And no, we are not free if we need to
carry sidearms whenever we go where there are masses of proletariat. England's
cameras and face recognition software is a good way to clean up a bad
area of town. I doubt it would lead to a police state. spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:36:00 MDT