eyes in the sky

In London, the Transportation Agency had some posters put up in the hopes of making people feel more secure in using public transportation. The posters are of eyeballs floating in the sky, over a bus, looking down watching it, and its occupants.

One observer states:

"I thought it was a powerful piece of political satire from a disruptive citizen's group, but then it dawned on me that they were real. It's acutely disturbing."

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,56152,00.html

The government states their cameras are reducing crime. Others think its just making crime go to places where there are no cameras.

So does that mean they should put cameras everywhere? Or how long will it be before the bad guys find out the proper color to be invisible on camera. That’s funny! There are only two people on the bus and they both have their hands up! Maybe we could outlaw certain colors. Or better yet, permits to leave the house only given with a verifiable itinerary.

Its part of our everyday life now. I don't even think about them.

They are there where ever I go....

Driving on the interstate, going into get coffee, pumping gas, at work, the movies, bars,.... everywhere.

I think the only place I have yet so see them is in the bathroom... but not for too much longer. They'll find some excuse to put them in the bathrooms.

I don't even pay attention anymore. I used to give them the finger, but my hand started to get tired because there were so many of them. :)

Soon after they make everyone go to digital cable.... you'll have to look for tiny cameras in your new tvs and entertainment components. Digital Cable is 2 ways...

Thats me just being paranoid though...

Closer and closer to 1984.

There are cameras in banks, Walmarts, almost everywhere, but these are businesses. I don't like them, but can live with them. When the cops start sticking them on the streetcorners to monitor us, I object. I've read that in the UK the excuse is so they can better protect the public.

I think it's a major intrusion into personal privacy. Wanna bet, though, that people in the major cities won't raise a whisper in protest when they start to appear?

Actually when they put cameras into streetcorners here there was a few groups of guys that got a bunch of waterguns then filled them with paint and the covered the cameras with the paint. One guy even got a bat and a ladder then tried breaking the camera's plastic coating.

Alot of peaple don't really care when it comes to privacy & freedom and they think they will always be free from being a slave to security but did you know that when Pres. Bush was talking about haveing war with Iraq there were protesters at the whitehouse so Pres. Bush setup lines called "freedom of speach zones". The protesters where told that if they crossed the lines they would be part of a terrorist investigations.

Its funny.... I thought the whole country was one big free zone.

I'e even seen cameras in bathrooms....near the entrances. They're everywhere. Planes, homes, schools, public restaurants....there's no escape. It is disturbing that we have to have cameras becuz we can't trust one another.

Ok... I feel like inventing an EMP grenade just to get some Privacy....There are CTV camera's every where....

/me Glares at the nearest camera.

- Noia

Noia > actually I think the govenrment already has a project to develop EMP weapons. I don't really think there is much we can do about privacy at this point, its almost too late to stop the avalacne now. I'm pretty confident that right now my college is logging all my keystrokes, and caching a history of everwhere I go on the internet, and my home ISP is probably doing the same.

I really worry about my privacy. This is going to be a huge debate in the near future here in the US, as the privacy advocates square up against the police force over use of these cameras in public places.

The polices standpoint is that you do not have a right to privacy in a public place. The privacy advocates is that a public place is something that is too broadly defined. They use the argument that a car is a private place and that people are free of illegal search and siezure while in one (the reason a warrent or consent is needed to search a vehicle). If a camera is tracking a person in a vehicle then they are intruding upon their right to privacy within that vehicle that happens to be traversing a public place.


I think this is going to wind up at the Supreme Court in the very near future. I don't like police tracking people all over the place, it leads to too much possiblity of misuse... I think the Stasi would be proud of what the US is doing.



El Diablo

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Syini666
Noia > actually I think the govenrment already has a project to develop EMP weapons. I don't really think there is much we can do about privacy at this point, its almost too late to stop the avalacne now. I'm pretty confident that right now my college is logging all my keystrokes, and caching a history of everwhere I go on the internet, and my home ISP is probably doing the same.

---

:( I'd have to agree with you there Syini... most schools and ISPs likely are using a Proxy service on the way out of their network to the wild. At least its more likely at the school I'd guess. Maybe just me... :confused:

Near the place of my employment, there are tons of cameras. I am located across from a verizon and they have a half dozen on each side of their building. I can go out front and see 6 of them by just looking in one direction.

So tell me why, on Friday when the bank was robbed (where I work), they are unable to find the person who did it.

They had to have been caught on at least 4 cameras just in the bank and then probably between 3-6 outside depending on their escape route...

In the "business district" where I am, they are everywhere. They have now gone past the limits of the "business district" and are even in the ghetto...

Doesn't make much sense to me.

Some valid observations. Basically, if it's in "plain view" (that is, it the polizi have a right to be wherever they are...) anything they see is fair game and not normally protected under the privacy laws. Example; an enforcement agent driving down the freeway happens to look over and notices your pot of Columbian sunning in your window, you can bet your coffee money on a search warrant being issued. The deal with the "can't identify the perp" mentioned above is probably because of a combination of the quality of the CCTV, the angle of view it has to the perp, and any problems the perp creates with clothing or other concealing methods. I doubt that any action challenging the use of cameras in both public and *legal* places (not where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, like your home) could find support in any serious court, no matter who appointed the justices. BTW, instead of worrying obout who sees you in public, how about when you check into your motel room, or the change room at the beach? do you check the mirrors for small false silvering circles that conceal a lens, check the "paintings" carefully for embedded lenses, check the clock radio that it is not fed by a cable instead of a power cord and turn it towards the wall, check the fire alarm led that it isn't a lens, ..... and the list goes on, and on, and on ...? ;)

In my opinion, CCTV should be permitted only when it is directed at private property. No video camera, public or private, should be allowed to set watch on a public place. A bus is private property (it belongs to the city). The problem here is that there are no laws governing the use of video cameras. I think that before installing a video camera in a building in which the generalk public has access to, a permit must first be obtained and the installation must be approved by the proper authorities. If we can regulate the sale of cigarettes to the point of lunacy, I don't think that regulating video cameras would be too much of a problem. We need laws about this.

Government has just gotten too big and too powerful. soon it'll be too big, have too much control over us to do anything about. We're coming to a time where our apathy to act on such matters will lead to our inability to controll such matters at all. Soon we'll have no say in anything. When that happens the real controllers, the powers behind the power, will take over compleatly. Big buisiness will own us outright. Just like they have in the past.

Just what exeactly should the the governments responsibilitys be. We certainly didn't get together to form a governmet to control ever aspect of our lives...to watch over our ever move. "but its for our own good" they tell us. Im not an inmate...i'll decide what's good for me! I don't what to walk threw life with a big brother holding my hand, telling me where i can and can't go, or what i should or shouldn't say and too whom.

This is still a democracy. An unwillingness to act is a vote for those that will act. And they wont be acting in our best interests.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by phishphreek80
So tell me why, on Friday when the bank was robbed (where I work), they are unable to find the person who did it.

---

I'm sorry... the bank robbery taking place is a terrible thing. But I must chuckle a bit at the irony of that situation... all those cameras and not any help for the authorities. :D :confused:

Privacy is a real problem with today's application of technology. Our e-mail is read by our companies they spy on our computers, they watch us go to the bathroom (although, there could be some legal ramifications there).

I guess if you want to be truely anonymous you need to live in Bute Montana and work on a ranch.

I read someplce that their are CCTV cameras that cover every Sq.Ft of the metropolitin areas of the UK with the exception of the Royal residences... (outside that is)... and that they cover every Sq. Mile of hiway... That is a bit much considering that for the first time in its history Scotland Yard is requiring all of its officers to wear body armor now because of the INCREASE in crime... And they say the cameras are to make the public safer...

Quote:

---

Just what exeactly should the the governments responsibilitys be. We certainly didn't get together to form a governmet to control ever aspect of our lives...to watch over our ever move. "but its for our own good" they tell us. Im not an inmate...i'll decide what's good for me! I don't what to walk threw life with a big brother holding my hand, telling me where i can and can't go, or what i should or shouldn't say and too whom.

---

Unfortunatly the slide into total governmet control of our lives started back in the late 20's early 30's with the issue of Social Security numbers... Try doing anything without one... You can't get a car, house, apartment, job,etc...

Quote:

---

This is still a democracy. An unwillingness to act is a vote for those that will act. And they wont be acting in our best interests.

---

The US was never meant to be a democracy... It was set up as Republic... Not a lot of difference but enough so that if we still had a Republic we wouldn't be worrying about the loss of freedom as we are now... To bad the people we elect can't read and understand the very document they swear to uphold and defend... They are to worried about re-election to worry about what the people really want, need, and desire IMO... they want everyone to be happy thinking that the Constitution gives everyone the right to be happy... My version reads the pursuit of happiness...