A Law to Spy Back on Government Surveillance Cameras?

mattnyc99 writes "As the Senate begins debate today on wider new surveillance legislation, Instapundit blogger and University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds has an interesting op-ed as part of Popular Mechanics' cover story on the looming power of spy cameras in America. He cites numerous court cases to argue that our privacy concerns may be backwards, and that there should be a new law for citizen rights — that if Big Brother can keep an eye on us in public spaces, we ought to be able to look back. From the accompanying podcast: 'Realistically I don't think we're going to get much in the way of limits on government and business surveillance. So I think we should be focusing more on making it safe, on making it a double-edged sword.'"

Comments

Reverse Surveillance

[Raindance]

Well, I think anyone really interested in the idea of reverse surveillance should read Obama's innovation plan.

From the "open government" part of the plan:

Requiring his appointees who lead Executive Branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can watch a live feed on the Internet as the agencies debate and deliberate the issues that affect American society. He will ensure that these proceedings are archived for all Americans to review, discuss and respond. He will require his appointees to employ all the technological tools available to allow citizens not just to observe, but also to participate and be heard in these meetings.

There's more, as summarized by Ars:
        * Put government data online for citizen access, analysis, commentary, and action. The document cites environmental data on pollution as one type that could be made available.
        * Effectively "crowd-sourcing" (though that term isn't used) some amount of agency decision-making by tapping the public's distributed expertise.
        * Build an online database that enables citizens to track federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts with government officials.
        * Give "the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House web site for five days before signing any non-emergency legislation."

Re:Reverse Surveillance

[Hijacked Public]

No, this one is trying to get you to vote for him as President.

If he wins, he'll go back to being that other one again.

Re:Don't worry

[lstellar]

^ Troll please.

As for TFA the idea sounds interesting at least, if not completely sound. I believe our OSS community has proven to beyond a doubt that innovation + retrospection by others truly creates a product that works. "Big Brother" is not evil because we do not want to be protected from terrorists or the criminals or the boogie monster- "Big Brother" is evil because there is no one watching them.

Obama's plan in better font

[Harmonious Botch]

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:IMo5tMSMfO8J:lessig.org/blog/Fact%2520Sheet%2520Innovation%2520and%2520Technology%2520Plan%2520FINAL.pdf+%22Barack+Obama+understands+the+immense+transformative+power+%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Sousveillance

[Rob T Firefly]

This sort of thing is often known as Sousveillance.

It just so happens that this coming Monday, December 24th is orld Sousveillance day.

Spy Yourself

[mycal]

Spying yourself has never been easier. I've been playing with the Aviosys 9100a video serve with the after market Yoics firmware. I can pretty much install this
anywhere there is an internet connection, even if they people that own the internet connection don't know, and view it from anywhere else.

This thing also supports sound! Not bad for $80.

So go ahead and spy back! Until it is against the law that is.

See the Yahoo Group http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/9100/ and the Yoics Software at http://9100.yoics.com/ for this device.

-M

Paging David Brin

[StarEmperor]

The Transparent Society

Re:Don't worry

[CohibaVancouver]

Isn't it better to give poor people $13,000 in free money and health care every year rather than paying that to lock them up ($26bn a year).

It makes good fiscal sense, but doesn't make cultural sense. In the USA, personal freedoms trump collective freedoms every time. So even though paying more for inner-city schools helps society as a whole, it doesn't happen in the USA because it goes against their individualist grain. Ditto spending money on programs instead of prisons. Goes against the national culture.