Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
> You obviously do not comprehend the scope of the problem at hand. We are
> talking the ability to monitor and filter the input of MILLIONS of
> cameras, giving real=time output of deeds being done...
Great intro Mike. Suppose we could develop a camera that weighs less
than a gram. Then it could be carried aloft by the sphex wasp, a creature
which excels in payload carrying capacity and hardwired behaviors, such
as pick up camera, fly over Mikes house, go back, repeat. Looks like
all we need to do is make a sufficiently small camera, figure out how to
neurohack a wasp and all *assured* privacy is gone like the morning
mist.
At this point I am not taking any position about whether this is a good
thing or a bad thing: there will be both winners and losers. But the
technology is not far off, for I heard about a self contained camera
today that is about 4 grams [dont know the details]. If 4 grams today,
how long until we build one that is sphexible?
My notion is to agree somewhat with Zero powers who memed
that the existence of universal possible surveillance [UPS] motivates the
masses to prevent the rise of despots, and we certainly can do
this. UPS would perhaps be the greatest promoter of libertarianism
to date. spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:06:46 MDT