Slashdot Mirror
1984 Comes To Boston
walmass writes "In preparation for the DNC in Boston, 75 cameras monitored by the Federal government will be operating around the downtown Boston location. There are also an unspecified number of state police cameras, and 100 cameras owned by the Metro Boston Transit Authority. Quote: 'And it's here to stay: Boston police say the 30 or so cameras installed for the convention will be used throughout the city once the event is over. "We own them now," said police Superintendent Robert Dunford. "We're certainly not going to put them in a closet."'"
Don't you mean "London, England comes to Boston"?
So will you still be allowed to wear hats or other facial coverings, so that you can't be identified by those cameras? Or would that be ruled as "unpatriotic" and grounds to be arrested?
who | grep -i blond | date cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; finger; mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount; sleep
Let's say-- we of course hope this will not happen, but stuff is hard to predict-- there are, as is sometimes unavoidable in a situation where there are protesters (and I'm sure there will be protesters) instances of police brutality during the upcoming DNC.
And let's say that the police cameras record this.
Do you suppose anything will come of said recordings?
Another question: when Britain installed similar cameras, there was some thing where some tripped-out version of the FOIA would allow you to request any film they had of you on those cameras. Does Massachusetts have any kind of state-local version of the FOIA that would allow private organizations to request copies of these Boston street cameras?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
I've handed over thousands of dollars in cash for computers no problem. The worst flak I've ever caught was "may I see some ID?" while $1000 in 20s were passed under a UV light. I initially declined, but then flashed my driver's license because I didn't want to go to another store. Nothing was noted down, the cashier was too busy checking bills.
I've only been ID'd once, but I've bought PCs, a laptop, and a thousand dollar PDA all in cash with no problem. Everyone has checked at least half the bills under a UV lamp though.
Hell, a bunch of places have offered to let me avoid tax on small items if I pay in cash.
I'm just waiting for some "patriot" who has line of sight to the lens to aim a laser pointer at it, and leave it there. Some cameras won't be vulnerable to this, but at least a few will be across the street from someone that has a condo with a balcony, wouldn't they?
Lord knows that if I owned a small business or home near one, they'd never see shit out of it.
Oddly enough, the police department in various parts of Scotland have discovered that the CCTV cameras installed on public buses have helped to catch criminals. Fixed point cameras are helpful in deterring crime in certain areas, but eventually criminals figure out the blind spots in the system.
I've seen the television sized screens on the double deckers. A 16" LCD display is mounted on the ceiling at the front of the top deck of the bus. There are around six cameras on the top of the bus which cover the staircase, both sides of the back row of the bus; the favourite location for drunk teenagers -neds (Non Educated Delinquents) and the front of the bus. The display cycles through the entire set of cameras. Quite entertaining if you can get a front row seat. Then you can watch the ned-cam as the bus goes through the city.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
So practice an art long admired in the great city of Boston: civil disobedience. If you don't like them, destroy the cameras. One second with a spray can and they're useless. And then the cops come and guard them, and you post pictures of that on the 'net, and they look like idiots. If you get busted, you'll get your day in court.
actually, it's already illegal to run to Canada. The US and the kanoooooks have had agreements in place for a few years now. Good stuff, huh?
pm
** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
everyone here is going crazy that the cops have cameras everywhere but are totally oblivious that some guy with a camera phone is taking pictures of your credit card
Join Team Mozilla #38050 Folding@home
Well that's your problem for wanting to stay in somebody else's house, drive around in somebody else's car, and fly around in somebody else's plane. Money buys privacy. You don't got the money, you're gonna get watched.
I propose that we put a video camera in every hallway and every office of all major government buildings and play the videos back in all major cities across America.
I had a friend who went with cash for everything. He lived in an apartment and paid cash for that. A cell phone was out of the question for awhile (this was several years ago) until he managed to get a service plan with Sprint. It was the prepaid version of their plan. Of course, these days you could get a prepaid phone from just about anyone.
The two biggest things I would see a problem with would be a) big ticket items and b) credit rating.
The big ticket items like cars and especially houses are going to require you to either save the money and pay cash for them or have a rich relative willing to lend you the money. Saving for a car may not be a big deal, especially if you don't want or need the latest models out of Detroit. Saving up for a house is an exercise I don't have the patience for.
A credit rating would seem to be useless. If you're living by paying for things with cash, what need do you have for a credit rating? Some companies, however, do background checks on potential employees, including a credit check. Also, and I wish I had more details, I recently was involved in "something" that at first glance I thought should NOT have required a credit check, but the other party did. After it was explained to me, it did some logical, even if I didn't like it. Maybe it was insurance? I don't recall.
Anyway, you would have a bad credit rating because you would have no credit history.
This becomes more of an issue if you eventually decide to go back to a non-cash lifestyle, at which point you begin to have serious problems getting better deals (finance rates, for example) on things.
So continue researching and be careful. If you don't think you can stick with it, I would say it isn't for you.
What you can do, though, is to reduce your footprint. Eliminate as many cards and other credit accounts as possible while paying for cash as much as you can. Stick with a car note, a house note and a credit card that you use to charge a little bit of money on each month while paying it off completely each billing cycle. Think of it is a "good credit report fee" when you see the small interest charge on each monthly bill.
You were sober enough to think about security cameras the last time you pissed on the sidewalk? And sober enough to care?
In the UK the Data Protection Act (well, an extension to it under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 IIRC) specifies that you have the right to request any information that may be held about you from any data controller - this includes obtaining any CCTV footage you appear in.
This is rarely used unfortunately, especially given the density of cameras here: I live in a fairly small town (Glossop, Derbyshire) and there are 8 cameras on the main street alone. I commute to work in Manchester by train and, between home and my office, I must pass about 30 cameras.
actually, it's already illegal to run to Canada. The US and the kanoooooks have had agreements in place for a few years now. Good stuff, huh?
It was illegal to run to Canada to avoid the draft in the Vietnam era too. The difference now is that the Canadian government has signed a deal with the American government to send back draft dodgers.
This is not something the average man on the street has heard about. I do wonder how long it would take after the first group of dodgers gets sent back before political pressure would force the Canadian government to stop. Remember that Canada has only once in its history had a draft. And those soldiers drafted were not even sent to the war, they were used to protect home military bases to free up the soldiers who were protecting them.
Citizen d474 is so rightwise you can bellyfeel it.
Citizen 242493 should report themselves for such crimethink and malquote at the thought of facing B.B. and possibly comitting facecrime. When the Boston Hate Week commences, all crimethinkers will be shown to B.B. and know the joycamps.
Because such crimespeak is fullwise here it will indulge crimethinkers in their fantasies against the Inner Party, what is being shown here is an act of love, blackwhite love shown to the citizens facing possible action from thoughtcrime,sexcrime crimethinkers from the Disupted territories. Our dayorder is love of B.B., the Inner Party, and crimestop.
Slashdot is so fullwise duckspeak and oldthought. This space is doubleplusungood even for the Pornosec, it's such prolefeed. This article isn't even goodsource for two-minute-hate, but should be enough for the ThinkPol to identify crimethinkers.
Every new form of media has it's own Requirimento
If that's the price to pay, then it's far too high.
Why is it any different that a cop can see you on camera when they could otherwise see you as they drive by in a patrol car?
We have cameras downtown here and the world didn't end on the day they were installed.
Ask the potential victim of the first crime that's prevented because of the cameras if the price is too high.
Also street cameras are hardly invasive, cameras are usually installed all over the city to monitor traffic, no one cries about that, and the reason is that they are pointed at traffice and the streets. What they aren't doing is lingering into people's apartment windows.
I wouldn't cry foul about your city's police finding new ways to deter crime, and to follow up crimes committed.
After all what are you really losing? When you walk down a street hundreds of people can see you, some even taking photos that you may get caught in, you don't cry privacy fears then.
I really don't see how this can be a bad thing.
I have been cash only my whole life (32 now), no credit cards, loans, checking--nada.
When landlords do credit checks it's like I don't even exsist. I am finding it more difficult. Cash seems foriegn to people.
I also find it *extremely* intrusive here in California for Apt/Home rentals. They can legally ask some very private questions.
I wish it were back in the day when all a man had to say was "do you want my money or not?" slap down some cash and no questions asked.
Live free or die.
You *had* freedom, that's for sure, but it's been eroded over the last few decades. You need to act now if you want to preserve what you have left. Let's face it, you can't even show a bit of tit on your TV during the superbowl, just exactly what sort of freedom are you talking about?
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
white out.
Someone needs to make some strong IR radiators and put them near these cameras. If they're cheap enough and easy enough to make, everyone could carry them around just dropping them casually in line of sight of the cameras.
You are not, however, free to your local landmarks.
Um, and I'd love to see what would befall any person who engaged in any of the activities you've mentioned; particularly the reaction they'd get if they painted "god is dead" on anything outside of LA, San Fran or Seattle.
Is it even possible to live free and untracked anymore? Is this just the price we pay for living in a civilized society?
Yes, it is. No, it isn't. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that increased surveilance is needed anywhere in the world. The primary reason why more and more tools are being used to track you and me is because the technology is available and the government can never have too much control (in their opinion).
Nothing changed in our cities from the 1940s - the crimes are the same, rapists, burglars, gangs, murderers, pickpocketers, speeders, flashers, drug dealers - there is no change. Look back 100 more years and the 1840s will be the same. Go back in Europe and 1000 years back in time. The 840s, same crimes, no difference whatsoever. Then go back 1000 years more and move to Rome. Same people lived there, they lived the same lives, with same worries about the same criminals. May be they didn't have iPods with white headphones or expensive mobile handsets to lose to the robbers, but whatever trinkets they carried they probably cared just as much for them as we do for ours.
How much police did they have? The farther back in time you go, the less police they had per 1000 people. In Ancient Rome there was no police at all. We are scaried of the crime today, they must have lived in constant fear for their lives, haven't they? Turns out, they haven't. Turns out that even without police people somehow managed to stay fine.
So let me repeat, there is absolutely no reason to have CCTV monitoring of our streets, the illusion of safety they provide is just that - the illusion, but with the attached risk of government abuse. Do we want it? Perhaps not. Do we need it? Absolutely not. Can we change anything? Only by violently overthrowing the government, but it is probably already too late. It's too powerful and it won't die - it will grow, and grow, and grow until it devours the whole world and every free person is controlled by the police state. And ACLU or EFF can't change anything now, they can only slow down the inevitable progress to the totalitarian hell.
Sad, isn't it?
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
And he jumps out. Put a frog into cold water, and slowly heat it up and he'll just sit there and boil to death without ever noticing. Yall are making such a fuss over this now, but you still dont realise just how hot the water already is. I think its time we did what our forefathers intended us to do with government, fight with it. It is every citizens right to fight tooth and nail with his government over matters they find controversial, it is every citizens DUTY to question their government should they have an issue with it. And no, said government does not have the privelige(sp?) of denying you an answer. Despite bush's desire for blind sheep to lead around, there are still those with their eyes open. It starts with camera's and police patrolling public area's (excessively, not just like in the mall and whatnot), and it progresses onward. Pretty soon you've got cheney running the gestapo and bush tossing the constitution into the ovens at Dachau 2.0 time to jump out of the pot. time to turn off the stove.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
How the hell can a crime be prevented by a camera?
Umm, because you'd have to be pretty stupid to commit a crime in sight of one?
Sorry, I'm just not paranoid and that's not going to change. I'm not one of these people who gets uncomfortable just because someone is looking at me.
Maybe it's just a difference between Canadians and Americans that we don't sweat these kinds of things while Americans are (by comparison) more paranoid. Who knows?
If I was doing something wrong, then and only then would I worry about the cameras.
I'm not so arrogant to think that someone is just dying to watch me on security cameras as I walk downtown.
As I understand it, a camera uses RGB to record images. Most lasers (cheap readily available ones) are red and would only overwhelm the red scale part of the image. If they shift it to either the green scale or blue scale part of the data, they can see just fine. If you want to go to the trouble of setting up a red, blue and green laser combo to hit a camera, then you could be relatively sure.
Of course, if I am very wrong, I would like to know that and why. Thanks.
"But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
So don't ask them to vote for it and just unleash it upon them. Develop systems for anonymous whistleblowing, anonymous information sharing, anonymous publishing. Repurpose mainstream technologies for surveillance, use the same toys They have (or their cheaper off-the-shelf versions) against themselves. They may control the Laws, but we control the Technology.
I live in the south, and believe it or not, most of what you're talking about happens here too. Yes there's been some trouble with people who have kneejerk reactions to the explicit atheism of the "god is dead" variety, but even that is generally tolerated. No one down here is ripping Darwin fish off cars (I admit my Cthulhu fish gets some looks), one of the local 7-11's has a big sign out front praising Allah in both English and Farsi, (although since 9/11 they have also put up some newspaper clippings quoting prominent muslems saying "We're not all terrorists" type sentiments, so maybe they are a touch worried about being allowed to express their opinions), and the Wicca supply shop in the arts and crafts mall hasn't been picketed yet. Put up a "God is dead" sign down here, and eventually some jerk just might burn it down, but the police will at least take that seriously, and the local church is likely to just put up a sign reading "Sorry yours is dead, ours is feeling fine." Judging by the last general election, somebody voted for Angela Davis, and no one is trying to winkle him or her out, although maybe that's because it's not like there are enough Communists or classical socialists to take seriously.
Who is John Cabal?
Is that the real issue?
Tell me this, when you are working do you feel or behave differently if your boss is standing right behind you?
How about when you go out for a drink with the boys, and your wife asked you to wear an electronic GPS bracelet and a videocam built into your baseball hat?
All law abideing citizens feel and behave differently when monitored. This is proven social behaviour.
Would all police agree to such monitoring on themselves? After all, it might help prevent additional beatings right? I bet even the good cops would not want this on themselves.
And that's the real issue. When the government wants to do this to us in the name of public safety, but they aren't willing to have it on themselves. And it's not because they haven't thought about it. We're seeing the beginnings of a totalitarian society. The comfort and security we have demanded is now mandatory. This is putting in the foundation for total control.
Being free to do something does *not* mean you won't take flak for doing it.
I can walk into harlem and shout a long stream of racial slurs, but I can't expect people to just say "Well, he's free to do that!"
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
Not as stupid as it may sound. In the UK, the police took to videoing protestors at demonstrations as a method of intimidation, oops sorry, monitoring demonstrators in case there's trouble.
Worked well until camcorders became cheap enough for demonstrators to turn up and video the police lines which caused a similar level of discomfort.
Some enterprising types will even send you a copy of their (admittedly one sided) handy work.
.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
ok, lets update the rule then. if you say "meme" or "paradigm" or any other buzzword, you lose.
All words were buzzwords when they were young. This is how useful new words happen.
Abandoning any conversation when a buzzword shows up cuts you out of all conversations about subjects where an important generalization has been made recently (in language-evolutionary timescales).
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way