So, full circle, you're okay with a film crew recording you and your family in public at all times?

It’s a false equivalence. Passive surveillance cameras aren’t the same as having a bunch of annoying people trailing me, which gives rise to the concern for the personal safety of me and my family. So I reject the comparison.

▲

foltik 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

What about if/when those cameras are no longer really passive, and everything they see gets autonomously compiled into a dossier on your activities and movements?

	▲	otterley 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		That’s a separate issue. Real time observation is one thing. What happens with the data afterwards is another. Now, the obvious response to that is “if you’re not watching, it can’t be recorded in the first place.” But we have legitimate reasons for wanting to observe public activities. The question is, how do we strike the right balance between legitimate use and abuse?

▲

SecretDreams 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Passive surveillance cameras aren’t the same as having a bunch of annoying people trailing me, which gives rise to the concern for the personal safety of me and my family. So I reject the comparison.

Rejecting reality doesn't mean it's not real. The direction passive surveillance is going and is at is already approaching active surveillance in terms of outcomes. The only difference is it's being applied more uniformly, rather than just to a specific individual. But the outcomes in terms of tracking all of our whereabouts are indistinguishable.

This is the entire premise of the post, which you are tiptoeing around and never directly answering the question of "is it fine for everyone to be tracked in public at all times"? A yes or no here would be helpful.

	▲	otterley 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]