Cities Worldwide Spent Over $3 Billion Last Year To Peep On You (cnet.com)

The world market for security equipment in city surveillance surged past $3 billion last year and won't be slowing down anytime soon, a research report by IHS Markit said Wednesday. From a report: State capitals and major cities have been spurring rapid development of city surveillance market in recent years, mostly to help police forces maintain public safety and reduce crime, the researcher said. Demand has surged for video content analysis, like facial recognition, as well as for things like body-worn cameras and services for police officers. IHS Markit estimated the city surveillance market will grow at average annual rate of 14.6 percent from 2016 to 2021. China is the biggest market for security equipment in city surveillance, taking up a two-thirds share, and it will also be the first country to widely use facial recognition in city surveillance projects, according to the researcher. More than 10,000 smart cameras are expected to roll out in Shenzhen city this year.

Comments

Cities paying for it? No. YOU are paying for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

The nature of government is such that you are being forced to pay for your own breach of privacy.

I'll just close my curtains

[bobstreo]

Peep is probably not the word they intend, they mean monitor/spy/track/control.

It's even more intrusive when you consider that most people have an always on, personal tracking GPS/locater in their pockets and purses all the time.

Cockroaches

[Rick Schumann]

Governments like the communists in China don't seem to understand: The more cameras they install, the more actual criminals will improve at hiding, and the more the average citizen, minding their own business, is made miserable. Even if they implanted GPS, cameras, and microphones on everyone, cradle-to-grave, criminals will find ways to circumvent it all and do what they want to do anyway. Meanwhile, again, the average citizen has more and more of their basic human rights taken away, more and more of their privacy destroyed (until there is none), and the more and more miserable their existence becomes. When will they stop? When people start committing suicide en masse, because the Afterlife has to be better than the Hell they're living in? I feel sorry for the average Chinese citizen. Before too long, farm animals will be treated better than they are.

Re:Cockroaches

[Rick Schumann]

The ones that do have something to hide.

Trollolololol.

*yawn* there's nothing more boring than an unoriginal troll. That whole "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" line is older than Last Thursday.
LOW QUALITY BAIT; LURK MOAR.

Re: Cities paying for it? No. YOU are paying for i

[b0s0z0ku]

Middle ground: somewhere like Costa Rica. A neutral country can be much less worried about things like terrorism, and its economy can be a lot better due to lack of military spending waste.

Re:making that less bad

[BronsCon]

Are there limits on the retention of photos and video I shoot in a public space?

This is no different.

You can't tout the argument that one should have no expectation of privacy in a public space (which is the only justification I ever hear for these cameras) while simultaneously shouting "MUH PRIVACIES!" The world doesn't work like that, it's one or the other and you have to choose.

Does it actually work?

[cheezhankrn]

I have never heard of any crime stopped, or the perpetrator caught via these.
Just the old anecdotal, friends with cars broken into under cameras in parking lots or people mugged in areas with cameras in cities.

The actual effect is never mentioned. Does it reduce crime significantly? Is it all just security theatre?
$3 billion on 'look how much we spent on making you safe!'

Re:Does it actually work?

[baboon]

I just finished watching season 2 of 3 of "Caught on Camera" on Netflix (UK CCTV, mostly police). Prior to that, I would have been as adamantly against such government surveillance like CCTV as anyone else here. But now, I'm not so sure this is entirely a bad thing. I welcome anyone to intelligently dispel my illusion.

With all the private security cameras and smart phones everywhere, I haven't had much expectation of physical privacy for a long time, except restrooms/etc and inside my own residence (if I elect to use curtains). Ok, on a side note, I also think flying drones (private or government) without permission over anyone's private property needs to be explicitly illegal. There is clearly some gray areas that need to worked out.

Of course, the TV show is going to focus on successful restraint of the the worst people and only occasionally show examples of mocking people acting foolish. But watching the operators track some extremely violent offender from street to street, or better yet, with that extraordinary good IR camera in the helicopter, hopping fences and ducking into bushes, is all really quite satisfying.