New "Game" Encourages Secret Police-Style Spying

[The Youth Counselor]

I can see this easily backfiring and being used for crimes.

Someone here in San Francisco did something similar [http://ourblock.tv/] by setting up a camera pointing outside in window in the Tenderloin, one of our highest crime neighborhoods. It quickly gained a massive following and became a phenomenon with people chatting and catching and reporting crimes. He started receiving death threats from criminals whose activities were caught on camera. Taggers targeted it's view for advertising. Others vandalised his window and camera. He had to shut down the site, the camera, and move away. [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/13/BA7Q14N5S6.DTL]

 

[The Bandit]

Am I and thenumberthirteen really the only people to think that this is a good idea? I mean, CCTV in public areas is one of the best ways of catching vandals, drunken brawlers, and other crimes committed in public. Only problem is 90% of the time they're's no-one watching, so hopefully this will go some way to cutting down on those sorts of crimes.

How exactly is this a bad thing, anyway? They're all in public areas, so what they're recording is what anyone can see. How is that "Orwellian"?

Also, in what way does this deserve the word "apalling"? It's not like this is a genocide, or a serial-rape-torturer.

Watching every move you make doesn't make doesn't freak you out even a LITTLE bit?

And what constitutes a crime? If I throw something in a trash can, and it falls out, am I going to be reported for littering? Or even if I intentionally litter? Or speeding? Do you say "Tiny crimes don't matter?" Then what are big crimes? Just murder and rape? So, now you're encouraging people to watch someone get raped?

It's a terrible idea all around.

EDIT: As far as it being Orwellian goes, everyone thinks that their country is immune to any form of oppression. If crazy shit like 1984 is to happen, THIS is how it starts, through very tiny, minuscule things. Before you know it, you've sacrificed all of your freedoms for the sake of justice.

 

[SirCannonFodder]

Do you follow the news? People as a whole are as dumb as they've ever been, while the population steadily increases.

Even then, consider the possibility of a group of people watching with a purpose in mind. Even if the cameras are random, a third party site (like a WoW guild, for example) could post a photo of a "suspect" for people to look for, offering additional money or some other reward. Chances of finding that person doing something suspicious then increase to more realistic probabilities.

Yeah, it'd increase it to the same probabilities as a lottery syndicate.

I can see this easily backfiring and being used for crimes.

Someone here in San Francisco did something similar [http://ourblock.tv/] by setting up a camera pointing outside in window in the Tenderloin, one of our highest crime neighborhoods. It quickly gained a massive following and became a phenomenon with people chatting and catching and reporting crimes. He started receiving death threats from criminals whose activities were caught on camera. Taggers targeted it's view for advertising. Others vandalised his window and camera. He had to shut down the site, the camera, and move away. [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/13/BA7Q14N5S6.DTL]

Well, 1) This will involve far more than a single CCTV camera. 2) It'll be anonymous for viewers, and 3) For the criminals that this would be relevant, they can already go to the places and see the cameras for themselves, since they're in public areas.

 

[The Bandit]

It's clear to me now that what Western society really needs is a half-dozen or so decades spent in a total anarchistic system with no governmental law enforcement, so that afterward, when somebody suggests using widespread video surveillance to crack down on crime, we won't have a bunch of people making stupid fucking claims about it being a bad idea.

It's clear to me that what you need is a few decades living in an oppressed system, with full governmental law controlling every aspect of your life.

An oppressive government is far more likely than anarchy, actually, though I suppose it's up to debate as to which is worse.

EDIT: Goddamnit, someone beat me to it. Ah well.

 

[secretsantaone]

You can't seriously complain about this scheme and not about CCTV cameras themselves.

At the moment we have thousands of cameras with noone to watch them. What a fantastic drain on resources. Hiring volonteers to watch them for no regular wage allows them to be actually used.

If you don't like the idea of people watching you then complian about the cameras themselves.


To me, this is the same as a witness calling the police if you commit a crime. It's not really Orwellian.

 

[SirCannonFodder]

Watching every move you make doesn't make doesn't freak you out even a LITTLE bit?

And what constitutes a crime? If I throw something in a trash can, and it falls out, am I going to be reported for littering? Or even if I intentionally litter? Or speeding? Do you say "Tiny crimes don't matter?" Then what are big crimes? Just murder and rape? So, now you're encouraging people to watch someone get raped?

It's a terrible idea all around.

You misunderstand me, I was complaining about the use of a word as strong as "appalling" for something that I don't see as being such a horrific thing. "Appalling" should be saved for the things I mentioned, not for something like this. If you see this as being on the same level as say, Auschwitz, or that Austrian guy that locked up his daughter for 18 years, then feel free to use the word "appalling", but if not, I'd appreciate it if people would stop it being weakened from over-use.

 

[The Bandit]

You can't seriously complain about this scheme and not about CCTV cameras themselves.

At the moment we have thousands of cameras with noone to watch them. What a fantastic drain on resources. Hiring volonteers to watch them for no regular wage allows them to be actually used.

If you don't like the idea of people watching you then complian about the cameras themselves.


To me, this is the same as a witness calling the police if you commit a crime. It's not really Orwellian.

Fair enough. The CAMERAS are a bad idea.

Do you feel better now? I don't really see how your argument is relevant. Most people against this system would seem to be against the cameras themselves, unless you have some objection to the prize structure.

And if you are against this idea and not the cameras themselves: EVERYONE can ALREADY see you in a public place, so it's not a big deal at all.

 

[Maze1125]

It's clear to me now that what Western society really needs is a half-dozen or so decades spent in a total anarchistic system with no governmental law enforcement, so that afterward, when somebody suggests using widespread video surveillance to crack down on crime, we won't have a bunch of people making stupid fucking claims about it being a bad idea.

It's clear to me that what you need is a few decades living in an oppressed system, with full governmental law controlling every aspect of your life.

An oppressive government is far more likely than anarchy, actually, though I suppose it's up to debate as to which is worse.

EDIT: Goddamnit, someone beat me to it. Ah well.

I think you might have been reading posts in the wrong order.

 

[Brotherofwill]

It's clear to me now that what Western society really needs is a half-dozen or so decades spent in the grip of a truly repressive, authoritarian regime, so that afterward, when somebody suggests using widespread video surveillance to crack down on crime, we won't have a bunch of people asking stupid fucking questions about why it's a bad idea.

Finally, thank you for that. Was about to say something similar.
It's like people can't get their heads out of their asses and remember or atleast critically think about the implications of something as this.

...I live in the UK. God-dammit.

 

[Frizzle]

I think some people don't quite understand one implication of this. If people start watching cameras, initially for crimes, then they become used to doing things like that. After a while, society get's "cool" with watching each other, and citizens grow into a group of taddle-tale children. I honestly wouldn't be suprised if this was somehow backed/started/thought of by a government somwhere.

I think this is a horrible idea in the long run. If there are CCTV cameras, and no one is watching them anyway, then why the hell do they have the CCTV cameras up? The whole point is to watch a certain area, for a certain REASON. Shops have them to catch thieves. Some buildings have them to catch those who vandalize after hours. The whole point of the camera is to be an extra set of eyes when you're not there, or when you can't watch everything at once, so you can go back and check something out.

If the cameras were being used correctly, then this idea would sound completely stupid to anyone who heard it.

 

[zidine100]

As with all news out of Britain nowadays, lol, shithole (no offense Englanders, but that is how your nation comes off to me).

but let me guess scottish people can take offence.
Then i take offence. Jk, due to the whole Britain and not including scotland and all.

OT: I just got to say, giving people money for reporting crimes is more than likely going to end up in a witchunt for money, for examle a tisue fell out of his pocket REPORT HIM LITERING SCUMBAG, we want our money, or he fell over on the road and the rights are now red REPORT HIM more money for me (jaywalking i think i dont know the exact deffinition), or oh no he banged into someone ASSAULT fools, Money time (ok the last two were a bit far fetched, but still it illustrates my point.) ect ect unless we are in our own homes that is(for now at least..)

Or hell if there going to do this why dont they just put a camera in peoples homes and allow the public to watch us, im sure everyone will be more than pleased to watch us go about our Daily lives citizen.

Oh and btw this will only be the beging if its a success, it will lead to more sirvalence(sp?) in the future, you can be sure of that.
*this is a point for people who for those who dont relise that.*

sorry for the rant.

 

[The Bandit]

It's clear to me now that what Western society really needs is a half-dozen or so decades spent in a total anarchistic system with no governmental law enforcement, so that afterward, when somebody suggests using widespread video surveillance to crack down on crime, we won't have a bunch of people making stupid fucking claims about it being a bad idea.

It's clear to me that what you need is a few decades living in an oppressed system, with full governmental law controlling every aspect of your life.

An oppressive government is far more likely than anarchy, actually, though I suppose it's up to debate as to which is worse.

EDIT: Goddamnit, someone beat me to it. Ah well.

I think you might have been reading posts in the wrong order.

Yes, I think I was. Thank you. Though, it was an obvious tactic that neither one of us should've resorted to. It's on the same level as a "your mom" joke.

 

[teutonicman]

I that's a really good idea. fas-is-m!, fas-is-m!, fas-is-m!, fas-is-m!.

 

[Beltom]

For some reason this reminded me of Robot Santa in Futurama sitting in front of that big TV watching people do "naughty" things and writing them down.
Anyhow, i'm divided on this. On the one hand, it could be seen as another step towards a police state, but on the other, if it really does lower the crime rate and not affect innocent people in any way, I can't see how it would be bad.

 

[secretsantaone]

Fair enough. The CAMERAS are a bad idea.

Do you feel better now? I don't really see how your argument is relevant. Most people against this system would seem to be against the cameras themselves, unless you have some objection to the prize structure.

And if you are against this idea and not the cameras themselves: EVERYONE can ALREADY see you in a public place, so it's not a big deal at all.

Most people in this thread seem to have been against this plan, labelling it 'Orwellian'. I merely suggested that the idea of being watched in public places and being reported to the police is not a new one.

I for one am for it. The only potential downside I see is the making it extremely easy to waste police time.

 

[Maze1125]

It's clear to me now that what Western society really needs is a half-dozen or so decades spent in a total anarchistic system with no governmental law enforcement, so that afterward, when somebody suggests using widespread video surveillance to crack down on crime, we won't have a bunch of people making stupid fucking claims about it being a bad idea.

It's clear to me that what you need is a few decades living in an oppressed system, with full governmental law controlling every aspect of your life.

An oppressive government is far more likely than anarchy, actually, though I suppose it's up to debate as to which is worse.

EDIT: Goddamnit, someone beat me to it. Ah well.

I think you might have been reading posts in the wrong order.

Yes, I think I was. Thank you. Though, it was an obvious tactic that neither one of us should've resorted to. It's on the same level as a "your mom" joke.

No.
It was satire pointing out that such an argument can be used both ways and so, rather than either completely hating any added surveillance or completely loving it, what we need is moderation. We should take each new addition for itself rather than committing a slippery slope fallacy by shouting "ZOMG 1984!!!" just because it's new.

 

[Kazturkey]

I like this idea. If even one in a hundred more crimes are reported this way it will be a huge success.

 

[Hellsbells]

Maybe I've horribly misread it but it appears to me that the money awarded isnt based on reporting a crime, reporting a crime is simply how you get into the box. After that its just as random as the lottery. So that removes the "people report everything for money" argument. Also there would probably be some sort of specifics on what constitutes a crime worth reporting.

And as to using this for stalking. I also believe the camera you get is random so you can't stalk someone and the more cameras there are the less likely you are to see something that effects you personally.

And lastely the "this is orwellian" argument. Well yes sort of. Except that theyre only in public places so people can in theory see you anyway. Although I do agree with the "it turns people into tattle-telling children" argument and that if it went anywhere farther than public servailence it would infact be orwellian.

Just my 2 cents =]