World Sousveillance Day

Sousveillance Cyborg writes: "Sousveillance is inverse surveillance, and a worldwide community of cyborgs is promoting sousveillance as a way toward more privacy and less secrecy. Today is World Sousveillance Day (WSD). See http://wearcam.org/wsd.htm. Transmitting live from around the world at noon (moving with time zone)."

the right thing to do

[volkris]

This is actually a puckish wrapper around how things should be run daily anyway. There is nothing wrong with cameras mounted on streets and stores filming whomever might be around, but at the same time there is nothing wrong with cameras being held by people filming whatever they may see. The fact is that cameras create accountability (and generate raw information) no matter where and how they're used. Whether that accountability is acted upon and acted upon in a correct manner is a seperate subject that doesn't really involve the cameras themselves.

As Brinn said, there is no stopping the spread of cameras now, but why would anyone want to stop them anyway? People need to simply accept the cameras and use them instead of fighting them every step of the way, missing out on the great things that cameras can provide average citizens.

Re:It's a bit late to announce this

[digitalunity]

What's your point? Did you even read the article? no? That's what I thought. Why don't you go read the article and come back later.

I did however read it and there are a few scary points brought out. What do I think? I think I want a "Federal Government Comment Card".

Here's a link [brianwillson.com] to some interesting things about the governemt that most people don't know.

Being connected means losing privacy

[KILNA]

I'm about to be one of those snooty people who points out the hypocracy of the Slashdot crowd, so I'll try to be brief. Do you want to be a part of a community or do you want to have privacy? It's a matter of degrees, but at the most basic level those two concepts are mutually exclusive. The deal is, if you interact with human beings, you lose privacy. The risk of being surveiled comes with the risk of going someplace. You can't be completely anonymous and live a normal life. Try getting a phone or car or decent internet access without a name. Part of being a memeber of the human race is to have an identity that other people, businesses and even your government can associate with you... and part of that identity is a face (which just might be photographed at any time if you happen to be out in the real world). Don't want your face on the Jumbotron? Watch the game on TV in your Y2K bomb shelter in Montana if you're all that concerned. :)

Re:It's a bit late to announce this

[bani]

Willson's essays on depleted uranium and "alternative" medicine are barking mad, and put a huge question mark above all his other essays.

The essays may be "interesting", but that doesn't mean there is any more truth to them than the X-Files.

Re: Missed the point? I don't think I did.

[Tsar]

You post the question "Where's the accountability?" — anonymously?

Did you see the Sousveillance video [wearcam.org]? He's not doing exposés of concealed cameras in dressing rooms; he's strolling through department stores, asking employees idiotic questions about the "mysterious dark domes" in the ceiling as if they were part some massive coverup, and none of the poor idiots (non-University of Toronto CE students [netsol.com]) around him were totally unaware that they were being watched in a department store. It inspires no social change (except perhaps more stores banning video cameras), and has no effect outside of feeding his overinflated ego. This is nothing more than stupid camera tricks posing as citizen activism.

While we're on the subject, let's throw it out to the group—how would you like this guy to walk into your employer's business and start following you around with a camcorder? "Why do I have to have a password to use one of these computers? What are those weird white boxes with red lights in the corners of the ceiling? Why is the server room locked? Why did you call the police?" Seems pretty juvenile when you think about it.