On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 10:22 -0400, Larry Seltzer wrote: > I don't understand this at all. Please explain why I should feel my > rights to travel or assemble in public are infringed by the presence > of cameras there (as opposed, for example, to the presence of police)
I would think this would be obvious. A police officer isn't recording everything for future use. Think about it for a minute. Everywhere you've ever been is recorded, along with everyone else. How useful would that have been to McCarthy? Someone looking to blackmail or discredit you? Make a false charge more credible to a judge/jury? Once collected, there is no guarantee of an expiration. A human collecting information is naturally limited in the scope and duration of information retention. A file on some storage device isn't. Don't make the mistake of thinking that the current use of such devices will hold in the future, or that today's normal and lawful activity won't be vilified down the road. Just like the assurances that the "terror laws" wouldn't be used on the general public. Scope always, always creeps. -- - Andy This is not the place to ask for a scooby snack or hand holding without getting attacked with a flamethrower. - Stack Smasher, Full-disclosure email list _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
