Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Increasing surveillance and control yet decreasing protection- why?

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Increasing surveillance and control yet decreasing protection- why?

    Less privacy and less freedoms all sold to the public as either for security or for 'environmental protection'.

    This even down to the government spending king’s ransom on ‘smart electric meters’ to monitor (you)r electricity usage or the switching off of analogue tv signals so you’ll have to watch monitorable digital ‘service’ .
    yet crime against the public incrases and despite this more and more petty rules are being introduced more often than not under the media radar to criminalize more and more of the mainstream population.
    What's the "opposition" doing? why crying out for more and more removela of rights freedoms and privacy of course!!!

  2. #2

    Default

    "Increasing surveillance and control yet decreasing protection- why?" You obviously know the answer, care to share it with everyone else?

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Greasy Till View Post
    "Increasing surveillance and control yet decreasing protection- why?" You obviously know the answer, care to share it with everyone else?
    They'll be doing auditions for next year's Big Brother series quite soon if you're interested.

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Newbie bugibba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    80
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    This is an extract from an article in Scientific American magazine about RFID use. It may be innocent that Alton Towers provides a welcome service to its customers, but just think of the potential to other not so caring users of the technology.:

    A tracking infrastructure will become increasingly fruitful to marketers as more people begin carrying, and even wearing, RFID-tagged items. At present, tens of millions of contactless credit and ATM cards containing RFID tags are in circulation, along with millions of employee access badges. RFID-based public-transit passes, widely used in Europe and Japan, are also coming to U.S. cities. IBM's person tracking unit is still only a patent, but an English amusement park called Alton Towers provides a living illustration of RFID's tracking potential. On entering the park, each visitor is offered an RFID wristband encoded with a unique ID number. As people enjoy the attractions, a network of RFID readers placed strategically throughout the park detects each wristband as it comes within range and triggers nearby video cameras. Candid footage of each individual is stored in a file labeled with the wrist-band ID number, then made available to the customer on a keepsake DVD at the end of the day.

    If RFID tags can enable an amusement park to capture detailed, personalized videos of thousands of people a day, imagine what a determined government could do—not to mention marketers or criminals. That is why my colleagues in the privacy community and I have so firmly opposed the use of RFID in government-issued identity documents or individual consumer items. As far back as 2003, my organization, CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering)—along with the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, and 40 other leading privacy and civil liberties advocates and organizations—recognized this threat and issued a position paper that condemned the tracking of human beings with RFID as inappropriate.

    In response to these concerns, dozens of U.S. states have introduced RFID consumer-protection bills—which have all been either killed or gutted by heavy opposition from lobbyists for the RFID industry. When the New Hampshire Senate voted on a bill that would have imposed tough regulations on RFID in 2006, a last-minute floor amendment replaced it with a two-year study instead. (I was appointed by the governor to serve on the resulting commission.) That same year a California bill that would have prohibited the use of RFID in government-issued documents passed both houses of the legislature, only to be vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

    On the federal level, no high-profile consumer-protection bills related to RFID have been passed. Instead, in 2005, the Senate Republican High Tech Task Force praised RFID applications as "exciting new technologies" with "tremen-dous promise for our economy" and vowed to protect RFID from regulation or legislation.

    52 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
    September 2008

    How RFID Tags Could Be Used to Track Unsuspecting People: Scientific American

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member needle_too's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    924
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Increasing surveillance and control yet decreasing protection- why?
    Because youre all mugs and you allow it to happen.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Do you know, I'll be glad when I'm dead. I hate this kind of world where technology is the new god and no one ever questions it.

    The first response that comes to mind but comes to everyone''s mind is "Big Brother is watching us", but not even to be useful as you say, just enough to intrude on people who are trying to live a life, with all the worries that entails and then to be hit with a huge bill from the State because you used too much water, or electricity or as has happened here, put your rubbish in the wrong bin, is adding stress to an already stressed nation. But they never catch the swine who break into your house and steal from you, or who take your car, or who (in 9 cases I think so far) murdered your daughter.

    When my brother calls he shows me how to view houses that have friends or relatives in them which is great fun, but thinking about it, why is it available at all? I can see my godson's house in Queensland in Australia, my niece's house in Brussels and my sisters houses in Dover, Kinsale and Mayo. So how come with all their cameras and technology the cops can't even catch a burglar?

    I'm so sorry going on and on. Forgive me. I'm nuts about some things and this is one.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member needle_too's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    924
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Twilight View Post
    So how come with all their cameras and technology the cops can't even catch a burglar?

    I'm so sorry going on and on. Forgive me. I'm nuts about some things and this is one.
    Theres a very simple answer to this.

    If the cops caught all the criminals, what would we need cops for?

    Its like asking a barber "d'ya think I need a haircut?"

    Notice that a lot of the stats on crime actually come from the guards and dept of justice.
    We wouldnt need half of these feckless, bog-minded yobbos and glorified typists otherwise.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    195
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Crimes against the state will continue take higher significance than crimes against the citizen (e.g., interfering with a speed camera is a crime against the state, being assaulted is a crime against the citizen. Reframe news reports on crime as to whether the "victim" is the state or the citizen.

    As the big global depression kicks in, there will likely be an increase amount of unempoyment, dissatisfaction and a move to the right of the political spectrum. The current left-wing style governments worry tremendously that as they have redistributed wealth upwards and created a large jobless underclass, that crimes against the state will rise, hence the need for control and surveillance.

    Decreased protection is a matter between citizens themselves, and unless it eventually leads to something that damages the state or costs the state, then expect it to not improve.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member Frank Galton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Meath in exile.
    Posts
    1,366
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Did we know that the Revs get to look at ATM transactions?

    In addition, Revenue has obtained new details from High Court orders of Irish residents transferring money to and from tax havens such as the Isle of Man, Guernsey and Liechtenstein. This has resulted in the uncovering of €12.8 million in unpaid taxes. Many of these customers were identified through use of offshore debit and credit cards in the State. Irish authorities are in contact with other tax authorities over property deals by Irish residents in foreign jurisdictions.
    Revenue inquiry on Irish clients of HSBC with Swiss accounts - Public Finances News | Latest Trends & Articles | The Irish Times - Sat, Jul 27, 2013
    The Daily Mail -- the world's biggest cut-and-paste operation.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •