What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
134 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+39Great, then you'll let the storm troopers in and let them rifle through your belongings then. If you have nothing to hide and all. Maybe a cavity search?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26What happens when more and more things suddenly are deemed a crime? The government has the infrastructure to enforce the new invasive laws. Societies are not changed overnight. It takes years of public acceptance in order for that to happen.
From Hitler:
"When an opponent declares, "I will not come over to your side," I calmly say, "Your child belongs to us already... What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community." - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
-- Benjamin Franklin - Alphabet, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29@suspended
lawls, I doubt it. I bet you pirated software/music before. Saying you follow the law 100% of the time is stupid. And what if the government passes stupid laws? Like the southern US states had anti-black Jim Crow laws during the last century. Not all laws are good.
If you watch someone long enough, you will eventually catch them doing something illegal. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23"Should your every move in public be recorded and available for review?"
No. Nuff said. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22We're watching you so you had better behave! /sarc
Big Brother, Brit style. Coming to an American city near you soon.
Is that what America voted for? I sure as heck did not. - spyd3rweb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15combined with the national id card, access to financial records, cctv cameras, verichips, gps cellphone tracking, warrantless wiretaps, and no due process (ala patiot act/military commissions act 2006). you're pretty much ***** if they decide to disagree with the government. oh wait did i mention the nutjobs trying to make firearms illegal? i am not guilty of anything, and i will not be treated as a criminal. we do not need the government to tell us how to live, to know what we are buying and eating, to know our exact locations at all times, to have a huge database file on every individual, to check our papers when we travel anywhere. we are the free people of earth and we are not your slaves.
is this the land of the free, home of the brave, or land of the slaves, home of the cowards? ***** stand up for freedom you jackasses.
YOU DO NOT GAIN FREEDOM BY GIVING UP LIBERTIES. THOSE THAT GIVE UP FREEDOM FOR SECURITY DESERVE NEITHER! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17"Anyone who would sacrifice a little liberty to gain a little security deserves niether and loses both." --Benjamin Franklin
America is turning out to be the opposite of what it's forefathers wanted it to be. Support this, 'suspended', and you might as well go find a nice jail cell to live in because sooner or later that's all we'll be allowed. - Aggaman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Where's my Guy Fawkes' mask?
- Dundasbro, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Ok fine, your goverment brings in new laws to protect the people more. Hey they might not be doctor evil trying to take over the world, they might have good intentions. But what this does is open the door to future goverments using these measures for their own gain, what happens if you get an ultra-conservative anti-gay goverment in? What if they then use their new databases full of information to hunt down everyone who has been marked as homosexual from whats been monitered of them. People who speak out against the goverment? Gone. People who attend protests? Gone.
My point is that I do not want goverments to have the oppotunity to ***** things up that much for the sake of supposedly making us a little safer. "I'm not doing anything wrong" is all well and good until they change what wrong is. - shadus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I'll give the simple answer here.
No.
Watching all the public moves that everyone makes is an assumption that someone is going to do something illegal, in America there is a presumption of innocence or at least there is SUPPOSED to be.
I believe the quote is by Thomas Jefferson, "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
The government becoming big brother is something people should truly and completely fear. - ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@Darkcyde - Stupidity | Ignorance - Different things, same effect. If you're trying to tell me that a huge proportion of the US population isn't woefully ignorant, then any conversation is hopeless. One fact to support this that should hit home: 51% of COLLEGE GRADUATES don't know what H20 is. Another - Bush's approval rating. OK one more? Nearly half (Some studies say more) of Americans truly believe the earth is around 6,000 years old.
These are the people who are voting to institute camera systems recorded by people they have not and never will meet themselves, while they themselves have no access to the footage. WTF are you thinking?? - Doggpound, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I would honestly give my life before something like this passed in my city. No reason for the government to be spying on us citizens.
- mfratt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@suspended
May I recommend some reading for you, its this subtle little novel known as 1984. - rocket000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8it all comes down to people choosing freedom or choosing safety.
i'll have to go with old Patrick Henry on this one. give me liberty or give me death. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@jrocknyc
You feel safe at casinos? There may be no pickpocketing, but there is some social engineering. The casinos have convinced you it is fun to hand them money.
On another note, everyone in this town needs to walk around with a black mask or a Guy Fawkes mask.
And on the Constitution Project; it is a terrible time when we need an organization to PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION.
The Constitution is supposed to protect us, we shouldn't need to protect it. - BasicTek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to know this is bad, criminals will find ways to circumvent the system, as they always do. Then the system will be manipulated by the privileged and the corrupt against the average working man, as it always is. This is the way of the world, it's always been this way, and it's not likely to change anytime soon. So if you have a choice to give the privileged and corrupt more tools to screw you over, vote against it...
- MadN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7But who watches the watchers?
Who makes sure the cameras are not turned off, in your section, when you are kidnapped, raped and lobotomized....
They will be on, when you seek revenge.
"It was a Standard Training Operation" - schnuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6can you stop scratching your ass in puplic please?
- magnificentruss, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Agreed.
- barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I do not need the government to protect me by taking away my privacy. If I fail to protect myself, then that is the cost of freedom. I am a law abiding citizen, not a criminal. It seems to me though that treating people like criminals would eventually turn them into criminals. As Milton Friedman said We should judge government programs, not on their intentions, but on their results. (paraphrased)
For those of you who say "If you are doing nothing wrong then what do you have to worry about?" In legal terms absolutely nothing. But in humanitarian terms, privacy can mean the difference between a bedroom and a cell block. - VeryAngryJim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5but...you just told everyone?
- 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You're sadly missing something - I may not have a right to privacy per se, in that anyone *by happenstance* might see me do something, but this is FAR different than having my every movement tracked by government-installed video cameras. People who advocate this nonsense are basically giving the green light to a populace being stalked by its own government. Of all things, this is definitely NOT about freedom.
- nicerobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Personally, I'm split over the whole issue. But to respond to faskippy's disguise solution, disguises won't work unless they look exactly like someone else and are able to cause confusion. When would they put on these disguises? They'll likely be able to track these people back to some place where either they aren't wearing them or are coming from a car that can be identified. This sort of brings me to why I oppose this. Far too often, attempts to curtail crime actually just inconveniences and burdens honest people that will not commit crimes while making the criminals conduct more elaborate crimes, possibly more dangerous and deadly to the rest of society. For example, terrorism and classic organized crime are still prevalent while attempts to combat them simply erode our liberties.
faskippy, you claim criminals might conduct crimes in public where people are already watching but when was the last time anyone that witnessed a mugging actually attempted to apprehend the mugger? Are you willing to risk they don't have a knife or gun they'd use on you?
For the most part, I think the cops are honestly trying to do everything they can to protect us. But maybe there should be limits. attempting to be 100% effective may be possible but at what cost to society?!
Additionally, the potential for corruption of such a system is simply too great! Tracking honest people doing less than respectable things can be used to wield power over them. It isn't against the law to have an affair but I wouldn't want anyone being able to know I if was. Maybe I have a drinking problem and am going to AA. The point is, there are all kinds of reasons to keep public movement private, it's personal and no one else's business. Public spaces are certainly public but is my movement through them public information? I don't think it should be. Maybe some public space should be monitored but not recorded, or at least not to the point of being cross-checkable with other monitors. But then, that removes a large advantage of the monitoring.
Society is the only long-term solution to crime. Not making everyone feel like criminals by monitoring them. Every person, including YOU, has to be far less tolerant of crime. To the point that you even stop speeding. Don't ever break ANY law. Don't like a law, work to change it but don't break it while it's in effect. Change the next generation's tolerance for breaking laws, or better, for respecting every other human being, and crime will virtually vanish. But I'm willing to bet most of you aren't willing to go there so just shut your traps and welcome the cameras! - freff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5That's the point. No reasonable person would answer yes, but it is slowly happening in a verity of ways to American citizens.
- cranium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@suspended
Not to Godwin the thread, but if you've ever wondered how certain people in a certain country allowed certain atrocities to occur, you've just answered your own question. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@jrocknyc
You are pretty naive about the people who stalk and mug people carrying large sums of money out of casinos. The cameras are there to catch card counters and keep casino employees honest. They do ***** all for your safety. - antechinus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Go back two decades. Even though there was a so called cold war going on, there was no generalized climate of fear, there was terrorism and planes had been downed (Lockerby for example) and even that sacred cow of internationalism - the Olympic Games had been hit. Yet there was no population wide surveillance like today.
All that has materially changed since those days is communications technology and the willingness of governments to use mass marketing techniques pionered in the selling of hamburgers, automobiles and washing machines to sell a brand new government product - fear.
Governments around the world have seized on the terrorism meme and done terrible injustices to us in the guise of protecting us from 'evil'.
Disgusting though it may seem, it is in a western GovCo's interest for acts of terrorism to take place. A 9/11, a London, a Bali event provides a powerful not to be missed opportunity to ramp up measures and engineer attitude shifts in the public. Fear buys votes, public/private enterprise deploy fancy security products that are lobbied to them by private industry. Mix in religion and cultural cards by GovCo spin merchants and you have a very powerful product. Further mix into this, shrinking media ownership diversity and media corporations courting favour with governments by publishing news which supports the GovCo agenda.
What we have here folks is 'Techno Fascism', and the average Joe has bought into it hook line and sinker. He says to himself "I have nothing to fear, I obey the law what should I care".
@suspended, you really are suspended if you think this stuff is harmless. - DigitalPimptres, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5James Brown, Toddler rape, this... damn, it's a disturbing Christmas morning on digg.
- MadEnvoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Recording devices are reactive, not proactive. Never seen a camera stop a crime. Look at any footage of one of these "reality" cop shows and you will see that the criminals don't care about the cameras.
- gklitt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Nope.
- webdevil, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@netdroid9
America is already the opposite of what it's forefathers intended. - schnuck, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7god, you people are so sad - what's your problem with this quote? who gives a damn whoever this quote could or should be attributed to? if you have that huge problems with it or its context etc., let me give you a variant of it, because i believe the meaning of this quote is more important than who, when, where, whatever:
"any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
-- author unkown - made at an unknown occasion in an unknown country at an unknown time - freff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@jrocknyc
What's this about disabling cameras? Don't you know that those cameras keep us all free, son? It sounds like your advocating terrorism to me, son. In fact, it sounds like there's a whole bunch of terrorist sympathizers in this place.
And so it goes.... - cetaceous, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What bothers me the most is the double standard that will prevail, average Joe will be held to account for everything they do in public and a lot of what they do in private however the bureaucrats, cops and private companies that control the system will be exempt from scrutiny. And you can bet that any company or government agency with enough cash or friends in high places will have access to the recordings and will more than likely make a financial gain from it one way or another. And you can also bet that the system will not be open to scruitiny by public advocacy groups "because that would be dangerous and compromise our security".
I reckon we should all wear traditional Muslim womens clothing, the full garb, I know it won't stop surveillance but it will annoy the crap out of them, if only because we aren't lying down and taking it up the arse like good little scared citizens. - lowerlogic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I, for one, don't welcome our new voyeuristic overlords.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3[quote]Great, then you'll let the storm troopers in and let them rifle through your belongings then. If you have nothing to hide and all. Maybe a cavity search?[/quote]
These are not the droids you're looking for, in my butt.
Bloody stormtroopers. Luke, let's get the ***** out of here. - crashflow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3*SHrrk!*
Announcement, to the guy at the intersection, yes you, stop scratching yourself, just have that looked at if its that bad. you've been at it for the past five blocks. put some ointment on it or something. That's all.
*feedback* - Afreyt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Damn it people, control your reflected photons if this bothers you.
- salivalnz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3People need to stop and listen to some Rage Against The Machine.
Get a clue, folks. There are thousands and thousands of pages of laws and statutes. Do you know what's in there? I doubt it. So how can you know if you're breaking the law or not?
There's nothing wrong with a little paranoia when you're talking about your freedom and the freedom of your children. Stop with the 'I'm not doing anything wrong and if you're not then you shouldn't be concerned. Stop being paranoid.' It's not paranoia - it's something you clearly lack: Common sense. - Po0py, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I love it when our government takes the initiative and does things without our consent. It's saves us so much trouble.
- hiPpymIck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3...in uk ppl wear hoodies..
- 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@yuke - He just stated - it's called due process. It's a constitutionally guaranteed right. There's really not much more to say about it.
- crazyman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2One Word: Dystopia.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Some things you just can't get used to. For example, the U.S. can't get used to 3000 soldiers dying for a lie in Iraq. How many dead snoops will it take before snooping on the people is also considered a bad idea?
- p_o_b, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The thing is, Eagleville is a one stoplight town in middle Tennessee. (about 10 miles from where I live.) On one hand it is easy to dismiss this as small town crazy, however I have always believed that striking a large target is the wrong tactic to strike fear in the hearts of Americans. Hitting small towns would be an effective way to "bring it home" to the average American and terrorists would be much more likely to elicit their hoped response.
- andergriff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Joseph Stalin would have loved this tool. If we ever fall to another dictator, there won't be a way out.
- ClayDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It is not a matter of whether I commit a crime, it is a matter of all my moves being watched. If you have no problem being monitored in public places (and in a related matter probably also have no problem that WGA sends information about your computer to Microsoft), then I guess you will also have no problem if I come to your house, open the drawers, look what's inside, read your diary, boot up you computer and look through your files, search through your cabinet and so on and so on. Please send me you address, I'd really like to visit your house.
- spurtle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If you disable one, there are two or three other cameras watching you do it.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 135 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is