Does anyone from London know whether all those cameras are actually operational and manned? Or are there "dummy" cameras, posted to discourage ne'erdowell's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
Printable View
Does anyone from London know whether all those cameras are actually operational and manned? Or are there "dummy" cameras, posted to discourage ne'erdowell's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
No idea. They don't tend to show you the feed y'know.
Well, on the busses they do.
Hmmm, speaking as (in a sense) one of those camera operators (because we have a CCTV system at work ever since we got burgled....) I can safely say that the "guy behind the camera" is actually just a hard-drive that never gets bothered unless something happens and we need to know what happened outside maybe at 7pm last Saturday. Even then the drive is overwritten once a month, so if it was a Saturday five weeks ago then the data is gone.
Since it's been installed (nearly 2 years now) it's been used to provide evidence in:
* an attempted break-in
* a robbery from a van
* two car thefts &/or vandalism
and we've been asked to check for records of an assault, and a hit-and-run accident outside (neither of which happened in range, as it happens).
I'm sure a lot of cameras are dummies, and they never really deter criminals, as our experience shows - most criminals are dummies too, and often don't bother concealing their faces, or they stand and gaze into the camera, wondering if it's real :laugh4: There was a Home Office study about 6-7 years ago that suggested that cameras don't stop crime, they just shift it into areas without cameras.
I'm less worried about cameras than email and phone tapping, which are areas where privacy is more important to me. In a street, a public space, I expect to be observed, at least by other passersby, so a couple of cameras makes little difference. That said, I still follow the general rule of "never write anything in email that you wouldn't put on a postcard".
Like all technology though, it all depends on how it's used and justified, and what can be safe in one set of hands becomes a real menace in others. That's what worries me about the authoritarian streak in the current government. They "need" all these powers against terrorism, and when we object they say "don't worry, you can trust us". Even if we could, then we still have no guarantees that we could trust their successors, who may well have an oppressive agenda.
Funny observation though - peoiple in countries with ID cards are shocked at our cameras, yet we tend to be more opposed to ID cards...
Neither shocks me really. What is privacy in public space, people see you. Camara's should make it easier for the police to react, when needed you will be glad it's there, and what is the drawback. ID cards, how is it a breach in your privacy. If so so are the numberplates in your car.
This is CCTV by choice on your own private property. That is different from surveillance of a lot of other types, including recording all telephone calls and monitoring Internet traffic, or having CCTVs covering public locations where people have a right to be and sometimes receive no warnings of the CCTV surveillance. And surveillance of bus/metro cards/tickets to track everybody's movements, or surveillance of purchases, or installing surveillance cameras or mics in a civilian's home. All of the latter are being made legal (and sometimes illegal to NOT have) in many countries these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by macsen rufus
Naturally, having a CCTV guarding your own private property and whose field of view only covers ground that is yours, is both good and sometimes necessary. It is a completely different concept than that of state surveillance a la George Orwell's "1984", Kafka's "Process", USSR's KGB and Nazi Germany's Gestapo. A lot of politicians use rhetoric to try and convince us to accept the latter by arguing for the benefits of the former, and that is the big danger. It's an old political trick to try and present despotic and impopular measures together with something popular, and trying to make them seem inseparable, in order for the masses to not agressively protest against the impopular thing.
What the study in the opening post shows is exactly such a development. Laws are formulated in a way such as to allow the former, but deliberately or by accident so that they simultaneously create a loophole which means the latter form is allowed. And when bad things gain juridical legitimacy by not being forbidden by law... bad things will happen
The main issue that Britain has with the ID cards (apart from why the hell they should have to carry and produce them) is the range of information the government wants to put on them , how many different organisations are going to be allowed to have access to all of that information , how much it is going to cost for both every individual (and taxpayers as a whole) , what possible use are they in the purpose that they are being sold to the public as .Quote:
ID cards, how is it a breach in your privacy.
Plus of course on top of the question about who should have access to all that information there is the recent problem of the British government making lots of mistakes and losing these peoples personal private information or giving it to people who shouldn't have it .
Rather unlikely, paying someone to watch hundreds of tapes only to find me farting in a bar and then show it to my potential girlfriend is rather uneconomic and the girlfriend leaving me for that....anyway, I don't see the problem with our current ID cards, I keep mine to myself unless someone needs to see it and it's sort of a proof that I am who I am, live where I live etc., making it electronic and readable from a distance however sounds scary and I don't like that a bit. :thumbsdown:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Well looks like peacefull people wanted to express their matual respect this new years eve in Rotterdam, you know boomstyle, good thing we have surveillance. Bit sceptical, why would they in a dhimmi-society such as the netherlands but hate is a funny thing.
Beeeeeeeeeeeeehtter luck next time beards
http://www.newspirittravel.nl/images/alg_geit_2003.jpg
What a plonker :dizzy2:Quote:
Well looks like peacefull people wanted to express their matual respect this new years eve in Rotterdam
Hey Frag if you think Islam is so full of hate then you should convert , you fit the bill perfectly .
Good one Captain Zinggg
Some more info make of it what you want, a cake for example.
http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/2...n__.html?p=1,1
Errrr...make of it nothing Frag , the topic is about surveilance and data retention , your story is about an allegation made to the police by an individual about a suspected plot .:yes:Quote:
Some more info make of it what you want
Ya, so it belongs here just fine no? If it's true, good thing we have surveillance. TadaaaaaaQuote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Tribesman is right. (think I said that before)
Surveillance in the context of this thread as I understand it means that the state watches almost everybody and collects data about all citizens, not that they watch a few minor groups of undesirables and get information from their friends or covert agents.
I think the idea to outlaw groups that want to establish a new order and abolish the constitution isn't all that bad, except if the constitution is an oppressive document of oppression made by an oppressor who oppresses people and is evil, interpretations of this may differ, however. :sweatdrop:
Idea behind it is security, of course it shouldn't go to far but camara's en ID cards, and the ability for anti-boom agency's to monitor computers of suspected naughty's. Well if they couldn't we would still be putting together limbs. If you don't want it kick out why we need it.
No .Quote:
Ya, so it belongs here just fine no?
If it turns out to be true it still has nothing to do with the topic .Quote:
If it's true, good thing we have surveillance
There we go , that didn't take long for frag to come out with openly racist crap did it , it was only a matter of time from when you wierdly link surveilance to multiculturalism .:thumbsdown:Quote:
If you don't want it kick out why we need it.
No.
Yes.
If it turns out to be true it still has nothing to do with the topic .
No.
There we go , that didn't take long for frag to come out with openly racist crap did it , it was only a matter of time from when you wierdly link surveilance to multiculturalism .:thumbsdown:
Already did that a few posts back. As it turns out I was spot on. But let's wait for more info.
You do know Churchill's famous definition of a fanatic, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Solving segregation problems by despotism is a bit of an anti-solution. Then you just replace one problem with an even bigger one, for some short-term improvements in terms of the first problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Not my favorite one.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
But yaya, people want to blow theirselves and other to bloody bits so they get to shred 72 virgins in paradise but I am the fanatic. If I am so wrong why am I right all the time.
I'd say you're both fanatics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Only a fanatic would call me a fanatic.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Moderator's Note: I can live with "fanatic" being thrown about, as in "very enthusiastic supporter" - it's where the shorter word "fan" comes from, after all... but let us not go beyond that into the personal insult zone, please.
Well, I'm pretty fanatical about people not doing that...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
It's a bit rude isn't it :beam:
Ah well, they could have killed +/- 15.000 people if it all worked out so what is the big deal really.
Since most of the western societies are already surveillance societies and the rest is getting there fast, I assume we're completely safe now? Sure, we may need to put up some more cameras, but that's it then, right? No more terror. Wow, that was easy. Wonder why we didn't have that brilliant thought before. We even started wars, invaded countries, toppled governments etc. All of that when all we needed was surveillance. :2thumbsup:
Yeah, maybe we should stop doing that and it will all go away. Leave the beards alone and maybe they will stop starting wars, invading countries, and toppling governments as well worth a try.Quote:
Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul
No Frag , racist crap is racist crap , no two ways about it , the only people who could consider such views as being spot on are people with the mental deficiency commonly known as racist bigotry .Quote:
Already did that a few posts back. As it turns out I was spot on.
Is that another symptom of your deficiency , the belief that despite being constantly wrong you are indeed right .Quote:
If I am so wrong why am I right all the time.
Beards don't start wars, people do. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
You are like Mary Antoinette telling people to eat cake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Enough, methinks.
:closed: