View Single Post
Old 04-04-2016, 10:34 PM   #10
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,729
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post
I'll concede that it may be a little dated, but it's definitely not, as you say, moronic. His ideas may be a tad idealistic for today, but it isn't a stupid idea. And as an award winning author, he certainly isn't an idiot himself. A bit off topic here, but I highly recommend him to any readers. His stories are highly though provoking and cover a wide range of topics.
Being a well-respected author isn't an excuse for flimsy logic. I'm sure his works are very interesting given the awards he's won, but he gave (imv) rather poor justification for his idealism. To me, he started with an opinion (embracing no privacy) and came up with justification for it, as opposed to looking at facts then basing the opinion from that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post

I think we can agree that religious extremists are exceptions to many rules. They are not like most people. And interestingly enough, privacy aids these people more than anyone. At the very least, knowing where someone is when they are kidnapped and/or killed by such factions helps give intel for retaliation. If sound and video are also being recorded, all the better. Knowledge is power after all.
I offered jihadis and security as the low hanging fruit. It goes beyond that - there are countless cold case murders, kidnappings and the majority of them, I'd say, were committed by clever people. Far and away, most captured murderers are idiots, since they have to think they can solve their problems with violence, and then go through with it. There has got to be a selection bias were the more evil, intelligent murderers are able to get away with killings, even masking that a homicide was even present.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post

1. Most people would think twice before doing something while being watched. Actually, regardless if they are being watcher or not, even just thinking that they are being watched is enough to change one's behaviour.
Only if they intend to break the law, or there is some negative repercussion to their behaviour. There's no reason for normal people to act with caution if they don't have ill intentions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post

3. Yeah, I'll admit that it is rather idealistic to think a system like this would be implemented. Still, I don't really see how it would be worse than today's surveillance systems. Sawyer's Hominids, Humans and Hybrids trilogy shows the implemented system. Another trilogy of his, the WWW trilogy is also about the set up of a benevolent Big Brother.
Let's move away from the security issue. I will admit that a right to privacy doesn't trump the government's ability to secure its citizens. The extent is a gray area but I feel like "need to know" is the best heuristic for evaluating an excessive amount of prodding.

There's a sharp divide in the privacy debate where some people think that government spying is the greatest sin, and (the sect I belong to) think corporate spying is a bigger issue.

For me, the NSA requesting AT&T to monitor 100% of its mobile, internet traffic was less upsetting than AT&T complying, and using the request as an excuse to develop technology to make it possible. AT&T was the only company to go all out like that, T-Mobile was largely non-compliant and Verizon only partially. With that information available, it wouldn't be surprising if there are backdoor deals selling that information to the likes of Google. It fills the gaps in Google Analytics that Google, by virtue of not being an ISP, has, and explains AT&T's repeated attempts to block Google Fiber.

Note that the NSA request allowed AT&T to violate its own privacy policy, and AT&T is making use of the data it harvested. Another problem I've come across in my research for example is the abuse of IMEIs to GSM devices. IMEIs are meant solely to prevent phone theft, but telecom companies use it to uniquely identify your device. This allows for clandestine service discrimination, such as charging for LTE speed internet on phones that aren't capable of using LTE radios, just because they're a smartphone.

In both cases, a company has more information available than the end user, and is willing to violate that user's privacy in the interest of profit. If a company intends to profit from me, they owe me wage-labour.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post

4. Cellphones would be poor a black-box because as you said they can be hacked and deposed of rather easily. However, they can still be used to track people. The more information collected, the more likely a crime will be solved. Making things more difficult for criminals makes for less crime, right?
Cellphones aren't easy to hack...I can tell you this from first hand experience.

That said, cellphones will only help track a crime if the criminal is an idiot. Which fits what I said earlier where the only criminals who end up caught are the dumber ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post

5. I'm sure the implants would be able to set off some sort of alarm if the victim dies or if the implant is forcibly removed. There is certainly technology that can sense when someone is having a medical emergency and send off an alert.
Technology isn't that advanced. We don't, for example, have the ability to put a bomb inside someone, and have that bomb detonate if someone dies. You could certainly have some low-frequency emitter that ceases a signal if the person dies, but that kind of technology can be spoofed fairly easily.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmoyes View Post

I'll admit I haven't read Orwell, but this proposed system works best is it's universal: the watchers are monitored just as much as the watchees. And because it's a black-box system, only the owner of the implant can view it. So, they technically are still private, at least until needed by authorities for an alibi.
You'll have to elaborate on the details of this system, I presume it's from Sawyer's novels and he didn't discuss it at length in the article.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote