So I just read about Indect and I was really surprised to not find anything about this on TL.
What is INDECT?
It is a project to develop a system that automatically watches and observes people in public places, detects "suspicious" behaviour, tries to identify that person, searches for information about that person via internet, police registers, official databases(search engines, social networksand so on) and traces and follows it. It is supposed to include unmanned drones, surveillance cameras, face and movement recognition, mobile phone locating, computer linguistic algorithms to interpret sms and chat logs and similar things.
What would it mean(in my opinion)?
If this would get implemented into our society it would lead to the police state that has been feard forever. It would mean a around-the-clock observation of everything happening in urban areas. It would search every data it could find about you just because you were running or forgetting your luggage somewhere.
A similar system has been implemented in San Francisco Subway stations. But this one only detects "suspicious" behaviour. This alone is bad enough, but the EU-developed system would go quite a lot of steps further.
Why "secret"? The point is that there is nearly no coverage about this in any way in mainstream media or any control over it by a democratic instance. So the EU-congress is trying to keep it secret before it gets stopped as ACTA got stopped by the people.
edit: i'll make it obvious for those who can't read. " a system that automatically watches and observes people in public places"
Surely you're not gonna start banging your woman on the street nor at the trainstation so really, think twice before you start talking 'bout privacy. If it'd state that the government would put up camera's everywhere then I wouldn't support that system, but if it's in crowded public places and whatnot,.. I honestly don't mind.
Don't see the problem honestly, if you're a good human being without having to hide something I'd actually support this. Too much crap going on nowadays on the streets.
Oh so u wouldnt mind if government would install camera in your house? I mean its for your safety, if anyone would try to rob u police would be there in 2 minutes, and u are good person and got nothing to hide so why not? Step by step.
Putting up cameras actully doesnt do anything. Uk has cameras everywhere, but still have higher crime rates. The US have drones over the middleeast, but they are still fighting there. Nothing changes, it just gives some people a false sense of security...
On July 28 2012 21:34 SEGGLE[8] wrote: Don't see the problem honestly, if you're a good human being without having to hide something I'd actually support this. Too much crap going on nowadays on the streets.
In my opinion, the government has no right to interfere in my life on this scale. Of course if you have nothing to hide you have no issues; but why should a bunch of unelected EU bureaucrats have the right to invade my privacy to such a large degree?
As long as the surveillance is only in the public i don't see a problem. As long as you don't do any shady business, you got nothing to lose vs this. The world is not looking to get any better soon, so i don't see a problem in this. As long as they won't interfere in your private stuff, (house appartment etc) - they should still need a warrant from a judge to search places like this.
On July 28 2012 21:46 Kanaz wrote: As long as the surveillance is only in the public i don't see a problem. As long as you don't do any shady business, you got nothing to lose vs this. The world is not looking to get any better soon, so i don't see a problem in this. As long as they won't interfere in your private stuff, (house appartment etc) - they should still need a warrant from a judge to search places like this.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither and will lose both.
On July 28 2012 21:34 SEGGLE[8] wrote: Don't see the problem honestly, if you're a good human being without having to hide something I'd actually support this. Too much crap going on nowadays on the streets.
authorities have proven themselves time and time again to abuse power and information
also money spent on this crap should instead be invested in education and giving people better opportunities such as providing investment for small businesses etc, make society a better place and you'll see a drop in crime/nefarious behavior, cameras don't solve shit they might just catch some people for your privatized prisons but society won't benefit
On July 28 2012 21:46 Kanaz wrote: As long as the surveillance is only in the public i don't see a problem. As long as you don't do any shady business, you got nothing to lose vs this. The world is not looking to get any better soon, so i don't see a problem in this. As long as they won't interfere in your private stuff, (house appartment etc) - they should still need a warrant from a judge to search places like this.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither and will lose both.
That's really all there is to be said here. It dismays me to read any amount of support here for this. Must not be thinking men or women.
On July 28 2012 21:34 SEGGLE[8] wrote: Don't see the problem honestly, if you're a good human being without having to hide something I'd actually support this. Too much crap going on nowadays on the streets.
That's the dumbest thing I've read today. I guess you'd have no problem with everyone reading all your private stuff and listening to your conversations 24/7, either.
On July 28 2012 21:34 SEGGLE[8] wrote: Don't see the problem honestly, if you're a good human being without having to hide something I'd actually support this. Too much crap going on nowadays on the streets.
Is this a troll post? I'm only asking because you only have one post, and your opinion is... short-minded at best.
"Freedom is not lost in one fell swoop, it's lost a book at a time, a magazine at a time, or a CD at a time." In this case, a few cameras at a time.
Main problem with EU is that people who haven't been elected by the people are making big decisions that should be people's choice. Like in this case, safety vs privacy.
Don't see the big deal. I have nothing to hide from big brother. As long as there is no abuse of the system, it seems to be a good thing. Having any degree of privacy in a public place is not a right. As long as you stay outta my private business, go for it.
Inb4 all the "thoughtful" posts about loss of freedom. Give it a rest hippies. You act like the government will break down your door in the middle of the night and kidnap your children to do medical experiments on them.
the problem i habe with such "i got nothing to hide" statements comes with the complete failure to realize that the state is not immune to abuse of it's powers.
The more you hand your freedoms into the hands of the state the less free you are. Logic is it not ?
Completely honestly the way I look at it is that people need to have the freedom to do the "wrong" thing (whatever that might be). Doesn't really matter if this wrong behaviour is criminal or not. What if I'd like to dance in the town square at night without being photographed and have my background searched?
On July 28 2012 21:38 ...what wrote: People get scared and they demand safety, until they realise the price of safety.
How long can society compromise between safety and freedom?
It's not a question if we can. We've always had to pit these two against eachother and we always will.
I wouldn't have a problem if this was national - but it's EU, which isn't elected and there are countries which are culturally and otherwise so corrupt I wouldn't allow them to affect Finland at all e.g. Greece, Italy, Romania. Giving a Greek official something is asking for trouble.
EPT
