Planetfurry BBS

[Scifer]

BBC - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-11068063

Sky - http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Woman-Who-Put-Cat-In-Bin-In-Coventry-Is-Identified-By-RSPCA-And-Given-Police-Protection/Article/201008415704447?lpos=UK_News_Article_Body_Copy_Region_0

Woman got caught on a household CCTV network stroking a cat ... and putting it in a wheelie bin.

This story baffles and fascinates me. Mainly because of the many different viewpoints that it conjures up. A lot of people have said "Wow, she must really hate cats." But that can't be, because she's seen stroking it; and if she did hate cats, she would have avoided contact of any sort.

But this only re-enforces why we need to watch each other on cameras. To stop each other doing stupid crap. If this guy didn't have a camera on the front of his house, he may have found his cat in the bin and never found out who put her in there. Or worse - never have found his cat until she got crushed into a cube in the back of a garbage truck.

On the other hand, this video is very open-ended to the woman's motives for putting the cat in the bin. Maybe she had something wrong with her? Maybe she thought the open street was a dangerous place for an animal, and the bin was much safer? CCTV only shows the visual evidence of what happened. The rest, is open to scepticism.

... Discuss.

[Rabbit]

I think the potential abuse of these cameras by government and loss of personal freedom they represent means they have the potential to do far more harm than good. But then I'm an American, and historically we don't trust either our government or our police with even a smidgen more power than than we can possibly help. If it were up to me, these entities would be far less powerful and well-informed than they already are. Certainly, I don't want them recording my every move in public.

[Jai_taigas]

I beg to Differ from your belief, with all due respect Rabbit. From what I have read, Americans don't really distrust the government in history as they just want proper say so on what's going on if they are being taxed or charged for some due process. From the Revolutionary War to the Farmer's Rebellion aka Shays' Rebellion and even the civil war are all about monetary issues when you get deep down to the core. And honestly? Most Americans could care less about "Big Brother" in America till Fox "news" network says something to condemn it. Sad to say, the general population are Fox Zombies... from what I have seen.

Personally? I say go for it, if it will make my college-town safer. Or the military town I am from no longer have it a norm to see at least a person die per day from gang related death. I personally have nothing to hide and the Government can "snoop" on me all they want.

[Scifer]

I also get the impression that, for quite a few Americans, CCTV is another way of the 'liberal media' whatever the hell that means, controlling the steady flow of communist Mexican baby eaters into the US. The ever-watchful eye of God is a much scarier deterrent from being a naughty republican.

[Syrius]

Those who trade their freedom for security deserve neither.

If it's on private property, fine. But please let me walk on the street undisturbed. It's not like a camera being on all the time is going to keep muggers away. I'd rather take my chances.

Also, when the government starts snooping, then you will have something to hide. Everything. Seriously, would you post over here every time you had to scratch your _______________ (Insert body part here)? No? By the same logic, I don't feel comfortable knowing someone will see me doing it all the time in the street. As harmless as scratching my ear or nose may be.

[Syrius]

Oh, that's easy, Mike: They themselves will be under video surveillance.

[Jai_taigas]

I grew up in a city where the crime rate per square mile was worse then New York City. Personally? I don't want to take my chances each time I walk down the street. And I worry about my mother who still lives there each day I wake up. So if there is a deterrent around, even if it's a .001% chance of stopping that next mugger. I want it there. But again, that is my belief.

On a side note, I prefer Benjamin Franklin's quote better, "Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor safety. The question now comes. What is essential liberty? Is not being seen by the government while you walk down the street considered essential? Is this something required or your quality of life will just drop? Personally? Let the government see me pick my nose. Let them see me scratch my butt. It's their funeral for their eyes. I am not ashamed of what I do.

It may not deter all criminals, but at least some will second guess doing that next robbery because the camera's are rolling and their faces could be recognized.

But again, this is just my opinion. I don't claim to be right or wrong in my view, it's just my own and I wished to share it.

[Kelvin]

[Teric]

[Syrius]

My problem with this is that it creates the opportunity for the government or its agents to abuse it. Power corrupts.

Example? Didn't the TSA say first that the nude X-ray scans were not saved at all, and was an on-the-spot basis? They have been saving those. If it has names and personally identifiable info, I have an issue with that. First, because it's not necessary to store them. (It's not like one can go back in time and commit an act of terror on a flight that's long landed, right?), second, because they lied. Third, because who knows who else is looking at that, and for what.

Now, I don't want to sound paranoid or anti-government. The government is run by people. Imperfect people. People who can be corrupted by power. People who have used and abused the authority and trust given to them for their own personal or political gain. Time and again. (The Iran Contras scandal, the AIDS cover up by the Reagan administration, Watergate, warrant-less surveillance of citizens based only on suspicion, and such)

Do we really want someone with such track record keeping an eye on our every move? Didn't we revile the Eastern commie block countries for doing that to their citizens, and used to rejoice because we didn't need to be under that kind of surveillance? (I caught wind that you can hear Reagan's corpse rolling in his grave every Thursday if you pass by )

Granted, the government is expected to protect its citizens. There is just no need to invade and pervade their lives in such a way.

And here in lies the problem: The average person is expecting the government to take care of us. To do everything for us. To cater to our every need. And I say this is wrong: There are things we can (and are supposed to) do by ourselves. Don't want a gun? Invest in a taser and learn how to use it. Carpool. Bus. Don't walk or ride alone. Crap is going to happen to all of us at some point in life. What we can do is either reduce the frequency when it happens, or minimize its consequences. There is only so much the government can and is supposed to do.

There is a reason why the first person of every conjugated verb is "I".

Anyway, that's my two cents. Thanks for listening.

(Who put a soapbox under my feet?)

[Tora_Frogg]

[Scifer]

There seem to be a lot of people here who think that Big Brother needs to be policed by a form of government. I hope you don't mind me thinking so, but that's a rather old-fashioned paranoia.

Films like 1984, Brazil and The Net portray a nightmare future where the government sees all and hears all that the public do. But bear in mind that these films were made before the launch of a little thing called 'Youtube'.

Youtube may have just started out as a fun way to podcast your thoughts and feelings to the world as a live video feed, but now it has become mainstream, it is MUCH more powerful. Remember that controversial footage of the plane that flew into the pentagon on September 11th 2001? Remember the footage of the perfectly spherical hole it left in the side of the structure? (An odd shape for it to make, seeing as planes usually have these things called wings) That slice of video was uploaded to youtube. The next day, all traces of the video AND the people who uploaded it had vanished off the face of the Earth. But I bet the footage is still out there, sitting on someone's hard-drive...

So here's the thing. If you upload something to Youtube, it cannot be officially policed or censored without 10,000 other people watching, downloading, or even re-uploading it to their own account. So in answer to Mike's earlier question of "Who watches the watchers?" ... We do.

Big Brother does not have to be controlled by the government in any form. Try to think of it as an extension of the internet, where the only police are the people who use it. It may be an imperfect system, creating anarchy in some places and bizarre secondinternet phenomenons in others ... but at least you can take that stupid tin-foil hat off.

[tijn]

We are the watchers? Hmm. Scifer, are you aware how vulnerable the internet is?
I agree internet seems very robust.

One example (of many): China and 'free' internet.