[Cryptography] "Most Americans Don't Mind Being on Candid Camera"

grarpamp grarpamp at gmail.com
Wed Mar 25 17:31:15 EDT 2015

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Ray Dillinger <bear at sonic.net> wrote:
> Privacy as we knew it is a memory.

No. this memory... this privacy... is in part defined by what was input and
remains in the brain memory of the individual. You walk through a park
and on the whole, nothing in particular was ever specifically input, remains
in, or is recallable from your memory.
What we have now is an applied technological error against humanity
occurring faster than the human capacity to process the ramifications.
Some would say nuclear weapons fall into this same category. It's that
old carnal visceral human control, power, advantage, destruction, against
others and innocents thing for which the only real fix is self learning and
There should be no cameras bulk surveilling public spaces, they
are offensive to the individual and their memory thus their privacy.
The only one who could have one there is the individual for their own
purposes... a personal notebook, journalism, research. Not a larger
corporation or the government against the privacy/memory of any
individual... they both can do no more than record their own front doors.
Cameras and databases are an affront to privacy whenever their context
can be or does switch from seeing blurry anonymous mass, to the individual.
Watching traffic flows is one thing, watching plates is another.
Blobby humans moving around vs. doing facialrec on them.
Yes, every individual in office of the government should be subject
to surveillance by the public during the course of their duties when
interacting with other officeholders. LE interacting public should be
taped under policy of the public as vested authority accountable.
But people need to get off the idea that if everybody watches everbody
in one big happy camera pool that all is fair and that that excuses
individualizable and individualized surveillance. And most certainly
in public or databases where there is no individualized interaction,
or permission of individualized recordee, with the recorder. That's
incorrect and against humanity.

> "Most Americans Don't Mind Being on Candid Camera"
[quoting the subject]

Bullshit. Ever walk up to someone and stuff a camera in their face?
They'll tell you to fuck off and delete that shit, maybe smash
your camera, and maybe even smash you. Same as if you try
to troll through their purse, wallet, phone, house, car, or computer.
It's not that they don't mind, it's that humans don't tend to
actively notice and rage against cameras mounted far away.
But it does register in their subconscious and builds a silent well
of rage that will someday explode singularly or in mass. Why?
Because human DNA is a free range animal, not a caged
one, and surveillance and databases are a cage. And like
nukes, humanity is a bit slow to conciously realize those
kinds of errors. The fact that people around the world are
even talking about this should tell you that something's
gone wrong and brakes need applied.

> Several times several thousand counts of murder.
> Murder isn't political.  It isn't "war" unless it's a
> dispute between nations.  Random yahoos with some islamic
> jihad

Terror is a fictional infection of news, politics, and the mind.
Rational people would know that, treat it as any crime,
accept it as the price of freedom, rebuild and move on.
Instead the world chose 15 years of ongoing irrationality.
They'll be lucky to ever realize or recover from that error.

More information about the cryptography mailing list