Julia wrote:
It's given me an insight into one of the aspects of TWB that I personally find deeply disturbing - that the population seem to accept what's going on. Doesn't seem to have taken much for *us* to accept similar uses of surveillance technology. It's wonderful for crime- fighting, and if you don't like it, what is it you want to hide? After all, only criminals would be worried about such a system.
I'm sure, as well, that technology is far in advance of what people believe can actually be done.
Well, yes. Only criminals would be worried, I'll grant you that. It's the definition of "criminal" that worries me. Are you quite certain that you'll never be defined as a criminal? Or that you aren't already? An awful lot of people who consider themselves to be upright honest citizens get most indignant about the police "wasting their time on speeding offences when they could be catching criminals". It's an offence, sometimes an extremely serious offence, to speed on the roads, but somehow that isn't a crime because it's nice middle class people doing it.
Issuing fines for speeding is lucrative, however. Isn't there surveillance technology that can take a picture, recognize your registration plate, and then issue a fine accordingly? What worries me about this particular technology is that it can monitor your movements as you travel.
And now people are finding themselves considered legitimate targets by vigilante groups, because they have the same name as someone convicted of paedophile offences, or because they live at an address that was once used by someone convicted by paedophile offences, or just because a nice juicy bit of gossip has been doing the rounds of the estate.
Or, in one infamous example, because you're a paediatrician.
Una