Slashdot Mirror
CCTV Cameras In UK Get Loudspeakers
An anonymous reader writes, "Big Brother is another step closer in the UK where the ever ubiquitous CCTV cameras are being fitted with loudspeakers so that camera operators who spot activities deemed 'anti-social' can berate the citizens below. In January 2004 there were more than 4,285,000 CCTV cameras in the UK (roughly 1 for every 4 households). No data about the number of CCTV cameras now in use in the UK is available."
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
Banu
Can they play the 1812 overture?
In soviet Russia, you don't tell the government what to do, it tells YOU! Oh....wait....crap
Curiosity killed the cat, but cats have 9 lives.
"Afterwards she said: 'It's quite scary to realise that your every move could be monitored - it really is like Big Brother. 'But Middlesbrough does have a big problem with anti-social behaviour, so it is very reassuring.' " And this is why it is truly Airstrip One.
The Daily Mail, voice of petty-minded, intolerant, closet racist Little England, is usually in favour of these sorts of things.
>You reap what you sow, as it were.
Stick Men
" You are the dead ", said an iron voice behind them. ...
...
" Now they can see us ", said Julia.
" Now we can see you ", said the voice. " Stand out in the middle of the room. Stand back to back. Clasp your hands behind your heads. Do not touch one another. "
He heard Julia snap her teeth together. " I suppose we may as well say good-bye ", she said.
" You may as well say good-bye ", said the voice. And then another quite different voice, a thin, cultivated voice which Winston had the impression of having heard before, struck in; " And by the way, while we are on the subject, Here comes a candle to light you to bed, here comes a chopper to chop off your head ! "
My wife tells me that when the communists took over S. Vietnam, they put loudspeakers on every corner and woke people up bright and early with inspirational commie songs. It's becoming hard to tell the pigs from the men here.
True, until they start playing The Government Channel 24 hours a day, announcing that:
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
They aren't even close to being as ubiquitous as they shall be in the not too distant future. They will be linked to your driver's photo, your credit cards, you name it. People will pay money to live in the country side behind gates, with guards, but no cameras. Only the poor and middle class will have to live under this great experiment in voyeurism. The criminals will find ways around detection. The rest of us will lose more and more of our privacy rights. Kids born today will be numb and accustomed to the lack of freedom, just as our overlords want.
---
When you come to a fork in the road, take it! --Yogi Berra--
Personally, I think this will backfire. It's possible to simply learn to accept that law enforcement is watching and recording everything you do in public, as millions of Britons have apparently done. But when those cameras start vocally reminding you of their presence, they may be much more difficult to ignore. We'll see: this will be interesting to watch whatever happens.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
"Come on now, that enough of that you two, get a room! And young lady, cover up a bit!"
I retrained myself from imagining what a seedy operator might say but 'go on, give her one for us lot, we are watching'
or, the fun, shouting out 'give me your wallet', or 'I am watching you, yes... muahaha... you'. Or basic wolf whistling and 'nice tits love'.
Bastards. Luckily I got all the deviant behaviour out of my system before I started dosing.
Not without incident.
*slash* applies for a job as a camera operator
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
The next step is an automated Counter Fire System. Fire a gun, and within seconds, you're taking heavy fire.
The U.S. Army has had that for almost two decades with the Fire Finder radar system, but that's for heavy artillery. Now DARPA is downsizing the technology to the counter-sniper level.
Well, just because it may be boring to you, does not mean it doesn't exist. We are rushing headlong into an age of massive amounts of ability to violate privacy due to the ability to store the data, and the medium to create it. We are not having a true debate in society about how to balance safety and privacy. It's a pity it bores you, but for some of us, we can at least make an attempt to have some dialogue about the issue before we jump into the abyss.
---
When you come to a fork in the road, take it! --Yogi Berra--
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Well, unless it's a speed camera, of course, the sole purpose of which is to photograph people breaking a specific well-known law, in which case it's a bloody outrage, shouldn't be allowed, a national disgrace, etc.
Britons support CCTV that catches other people breaking the law. Not them, when they were breaking the speed limit, but in an informed and responsible way.
No-one has a right to privacy in a public area. It's not as if the CCTV cameras are in people's homes. I don't get why everyone screams "big brother!" and gets upset - unless you don't like people looking at you in the streets, and go everywhere with a bag on your head. These cameras do nothing a poiceman couldn't do, they just do it in a far more cost-effective fashion. May I suggest if you don't want people to know where you are, don't go out in public. :)
So you would not object to a police officer following you around 24/7, never entering private property but at any time observing where you are, since it's practicly impossible to get anywhere without crossing public property? It is a well known threat in military intelligence that by gathering enough unclassified data, you can find data that is supposed to be classified. The same applies for public surveilance, when you make massive public surveilance you learn a lot about their private lives. That is why we have stalking laws, even though they might not do anything more that follow you around in public. CCTVs everywhere, particularly with some of the more detailed tracking like facial recognition is basicly government stalking.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The constant privacy concerns on slashdot ( which, btw, I tend to agree with ) are, in this case, focused on the wrong end. The important issue is not the number of public cameras ( as at least one poster has noted, they are in a public area where you could have no expectation of privacy anyway ), but who has access to the other end.
A public webcam, which anybody can look at on the net, is very different from a public cam which only the cops get to look at. The people who control the data get to control the facts.
Rather than bemoaning the number of cameras and now their accompaning audio, you should be complaining about the fact that you don't have access to them.
Public crime is like bugs: if there are enough eyeballs, the problem will be fixed.
In the UK, if a CCTV system comprises of more than fixed cameras with a general overview (as found in small shops etc...), it is covered by the Data Protection Act.
If a camera-system can Pan & Zoom or is concentrated on a specific person's activities then
In addition, even if only fixed cameras are used, the above provisions apply if the images are not being used for law-enforcement alone.
The Information Commissioner can order that any non-compliance be rectified, and since not complying with an enforcement notices is a criminal offence, the Information Commissioner can take the company to court - the fine is unlimited. If harm or distress was caused, they can also order compensation be paid.
If a camera overlooks property not normally visible from the street (back gardens, house interiors, or anywhere you could reasonably expect privacy), the camera owner MUST receive permission to film from the current residents - including tenants, or must ensure the system cannot film these areas. This includes Landlords filming tenants inside the house...
Just to put people in the know - the Data Protection legislation does cover CCTV, and reasonable expectation of privacy is included in the provisions.
Number of rubbish bags stolen from the front of my house in the last month: 6
I bet the devils did it on the same day each week!
They do it where I live too. Big gang of fellers in a great big antisocial looking lorry.
Joking aside, many of us who were alive before and during WWII do see the parallels of today's Western society to that of Soviet Russia. I was 12 when World War II started in Europe. At that time we didn't know it as 'World War II', as the future magnitude of the conflict was yet unknown to us.
Unlike most young students today, in Wales we were expected to keep up to date on world affairs as part of our studies. Every day we'd read from papers like the Daily Herald and The Manchester Guardian, and from The Economist weekly. We knew of the world around us, and we knew of what went on in the Soviet Union.
Many years later, in the mid 1990s, I was lucky enough to get to work alongside people from nations like Poland, Lithuania, Russia, Ukraine, and even Georgia. It was very interesting to hear them tell of their lives in the Soviet Union. In many respects, what they said mirrors the social situation we have today.
They'd tell of fearmongering from the government and the media (which itself was government-run). This fearmongering was used to turn the people against other nations and peoples, and even against certain ideals.
A result of this fearmongering was a sense in insecurity between individuals. Few people would trust one another to any extent. People knew they were being watched at all times, but they never knew by who.
We seem to have much the same today. Many people in our society today share the same paranoia about others, hyped on by the efforts of the mass media. The media itself is guilty of extreme self-censorship, and won't challenge the government to any extent. It thus becomes what is essentially "government-run", even if the government isn't directing day-to-day operations and selecting what stories are printed.
Today, as evident by this article, we are all being constantly watched by shadowy figures within various governments. The level of security is extensive, as is the cost. And what's worse, there is little to show but extreme inconvenience for law-abiding citizenry. Some are even shot dead, as we saw in London a year-and-a-half ago.
Those of us who lived in the Soviet Union, and those of us who were even just alive during that time period, we all agree: Western society is beginning to severely duplicate the Soviet experience.
That's "autumn" here in the UK, you insensitive clod!
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
There is a fundamental difference between the US and the UK in how the public preceive "big-brotherness" and the role of the government in general. In the UK there just arn't nearly as many populised "government conspiracy theories" like they are in the USA and very few people fear the government/secret service malicously "spies" on people.
Besides this, the vast majority of CCTV cameras in the UK are owned by either local government/councils (which operate and are widely recognised as being very independant of central/national government) or by private landowners and businesses. Very few of the millions of CCTV cameras which are being, and have been, installed over the last few years in the UK have been requested by any organisation connected to central government.
Actually, here in Cambridge (UK), they pretty much are on every street corner, at least anywhere near the middle of town. On top of that, they now have mobile units they can set up anywhere, which are used further out. Then there's all the cameras at things like ATMs, the ones in shops, the ones scanning your number plate when you park at Tesco, the numberplate-scanning equipment in police vehicles and in the new average speed cameras...
And you know what? The few relatively dangerous places around the place -- not that Cambridge is a particularly dangerous city to live in -- are still dangerous. My girlfriend still can't walk across a park alone late at night, or go through the underpass to get across the road. When they want to prosecute people for violent crime, the pictures are so poor that they can't reliably identify anyone involved. It's been repeatedly demonstrated that they can't read number plates on vehicles, either. In fact, the only thing they seem to be good for is watching outside pubs late at night to pick up any serious fights slightly faster than someone would call them in.
Personally, I think it's all gone way too far. I now shop at other supermarkets that don't spy on everyone entering or leaving their car park, I don't sign up for any new "loyalty" cards in shops, etc. I have even reached the point that I'm considering voting for a political party I never thought I'd support, on the basis that they have given a solid promise that they will repeal the ID card legislation Tony's cronies have forced through. Whatever else I think of that party, I will almost certainly vote for them next time just for that.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
"You... Yes, you behind the bike shed... stand still laddy!"
UTF-8: There and Back Again
That was my attitude when I was fresh out of college prior to 9/11. I've had 21 years of "land of the free & home of the brave" rah rah rah. I would read what was happening in the UK and thought that our Constutition and especially the Bill of Rights would prevent all of that from happening. Little did I know that there was already an increase in the seizing of our freedoms - 2nd Amendment via "gun control", 4th Amendment via "war on drugs", etc. And all it took was 9/11 to throw the majority of Americans into a fear-stricken "we must give up our liberties for security" attitude. And our politicians were more than willing to pander to it. The money from Homeland Security for the major cities has gone for more CCTVs to monitor the public. Police rave about how they can put more "virtual" cops on the beat to "fight crime." Citizens say they have nothing to hide because they aren't doing anything wrong and are glad they are now "safe" by being monitored 24/7.
I have since come to accept that whatever Big Brother mess we see start in the UK will eventually make its way into the US. "Land of the free, home of the brave"???
Because the majority of people in the U.S. are fucking idiots, that's why. As long as they get their daily update on the antics of Paris Hilton, football on tv, etc... they don't care. You can park a fucking tank on every street corner, and they wouldn't care.
If it doesn't personally and immediately effect them, they couldn't give a flying fuck about what is going on. It's wide spread apathy in the populace. The only ones that do care are ex-military, and the tin foil hat squad. I live in the U.S., and even I say fuck them, they get what they deserve. One of these days something else will happen that will give them their wake up bitch slap, and they'll look around bewildered and ask what the hell happened.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
Uk citizens are plenty aware of CCTV cameras, and in general are overwhelming in favour of them, to the extent that many (a) petition police to install more survelliance equipment and (b) install cameras on their own property. The only concern with camera are speed cameras, which annoy motoring rights groups, and with any suggestion that cameras are replacing the physical presence of police officers.
Seriously, the arguments about 'public privacy' you've seen in the rest of the thread are not very persuasive to an UK public used to things like 'Crimewatch', where CCTV footage is published to aid criminal investigations. As far as the UK public is concerned, the system is transparent and gives real benefits, and no more intrusive than having a real police officer on patrol there in the first place.
Thus the loudspeakers. I picture the scenario going something like this:
"Hey you with the ski-mask on, we see you! Stop beating up on that poor old woman. Don't you take her handbag, I mean it. Stop it! Really, we're going to find you, Mr. possibly a 6'-4" possibly male most-likely caucasian. We have software that can recognize you by your walk. Hey, stop that! Stop walking all funny! Okay boys, it's got to be John Cleese, no one else that tall can walk that funny, go get him!"
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton