Re: Time for a jump in quality?
Wed, 1 Apr 1998 03:29:36 -0800 (PST)

I wrote:
>Sorry; I've met Steve Mann, and he was opposed to the kind of government
>and corporate surveillance technology that you're arguing for

Found him again at:

"So I felt quite uncomfortable when video surveillance cameras began to
rise over our city, on high poles, looming over our neighbourhoods. In
fact, I would rank cameras in increasing order of acceptability (fairness)
as follows:

Government looking at people.
Establishments looking at people
Establishments looking at establishments or people looking at people
People looking at establishments ("shooting back")
People looking at government ("shooting back")

with a neutral position in the middle (people looking at people).
Surveillance is actually desirable when aimed at Big Brother (and possibly
also Big Business). It would seem logical that organizations capable
of wrongdoing should be placed under a degree of surveillance proportional
to their capacity to inflict damage on society. The potential damage,
to society, of a large and unaccountable organization, operating above
the law, is far greater than the damage that an individual might inflict
by stealing a loaf of bread. Thus it is possible that society would do
well to place certain large organizations under greater scrutiny than a
shopper at the local convenience store, or someone living in a house near,
or walking down a public sidewalk past, a gas station."

I agree...