On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:01 AM, <xorc...@sigaint.org> wrote: > I'd like to bounce an idea around. At the outset, I'm going to say that I > don't really like the idea. Like getting a root canal, I'd rather not have > a some guy drilling around in my jaw, but what can you do? > > Some years back, maybe 8 years ago now, prior to the Snowden revelations, > a Kiwi buddy and I were discussing the arising surveillance state. > > I ventured the idea that the only way to combat it, is for citizens to put > web cams in their windows, in their cars, have body cams.. whatever.. and > have a distributed system where we can live stream that stuff up. Open > source surveillance, if you will. > > The idea scared the hell out of him, and rightly so. My take on > surveillance tech is that it is like nukes. The only viable strategy is > deterrence. The genie is out of the bottle, the tech isn't going anywhere, > and so if we're going to preserve freedom, the technology needs to be > under our control. > > Open source surveillance is a monster, but its a monster that would bite > police and agents of the state as easily as us. Rather than the > government/media being able to selectively pick-and-choose which camera > angles, and which clips to release, we'd have to ability to check, and > disprove. > > I don't like what it means, in terms of enabling stalkers, but perhaps > that is mitigated by the ability to catch those fucks on camera? > > I'd love to hear reactions and thoughts on this. It's not something you're > going to catch me truly arguing for, its really more of a devil's advocate > type thing.. like I say, I just see it mostly as a fucked strategy for > dealing with a fucked situation. > > > This seems like exactly David Brin's proposal in The Transparent Society.
http://www.davidbrin.com/transparentsociety.html
