Lots of po-mo art-school language on this site about “encoding ways of seeing” and “gazes.”

The content itself is somewhat interesting but imo plain language would be more accessible.

I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about statements like these which seem to assume the reader is incredibly uninformed and naive, to the point of condescension.

"sends the information to a central storing place (called a database)" TIL what the word database means?

"Amazon can use your purchases to know more about you using patterns." Is this news to someone? Condescending.

"It might be connected to a network (via Internet or radio frequency)" Radio frequency and Internet are not really directly comparable

Also don't like that the site hijacks the appearance of my mouse pointer, which feels similarly disrespectful of the reader.

	▲	gs17 an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The way it's written, I wouldn't be surprised if it was meant to be read by/to children (or at least used by a elementary/middle school teacher).
	▲	raincole an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I think these criticisms are unjustified. The article could be aiming for less tech-savvy people. Remember the most tech-savvy people in the world are those who enabled the surveillance infrastructure in the first place. Also if you want any meaningful grassroot change, you need to appeal to the less knowledgeable cohorts. Politics is more or less "which informed people can convince the most uninformed ones." > Is this news to someone? Yes, many. xkcd 1053.

▲

tencentshill an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It's a very strange mix of overexplaining basic concepts and in-depth details. I suspect AI.