Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 62

Thread: Interesting links

  1. #1

  2. #2
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674

  3. #3
    Member Nachimir's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,461

    Interesting links

    By request of Moses, a thread for interesting links.

    I dallied over closing this thread in the vain hope that it could become something better. Alas.

    Still, I think the links are worthy of discussion. I'll make an exception for the two posts above because they're pulled from elsewhere, but if you're going to drop a link here, say a few words about it and why it's interesting so people have some idea whether to bother clicking or not.

    So let's see how this turns out, eh? This isn't a spam thread, because they just get abused. Any of that kind of malarkey will just meet with deletion, warnings, and yet another thread closure.

  4. #4
    Member lightfoot's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2005
    Location
    *teleports up front*
    Posts
    576
    Hmm, there has been another link in that post of Moses', which I found at least as interesting.

    Alright, I googled it myself. Here it is again: Top 10 transhumanist technologies

    It is about future technologies. More precise, about technologies already availiable not only in theory. Technologies which the author thinks are likely to gain quite some popularity in the next twenty years, and seem to have the potential to change what humanity is, in the long run.

    Very interesting, I think. Yet I would like to argue that we probably don't have the time to develop that potential.

    The average well-being may have increased, but the discrepancy between the well-being of the very rich and the very poor has increased in at least the same rate.
    I think it is quite evident that if this latter development isn't halted somehow, it will lead to more and more widespread aggression, and we'll all turn out to have much less capacities for luxury.

    I mean, go and tell about Cryonics, Virtual Reality, and Space Colonisation, to someone who doesn't have access to running water or medication...
    Last edited by lightfoot; 16th Jul 2007 at 10:13 AM.

  5. #5
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    In response:

    http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002651.html

    Soon -- probably within the next decade, certainly within the next two -- we'll be living in a world where what we see, what we hear, what we experience will be recorded wherever we go. There will be few statements or scenes that will go unnoticed, or unremembered. Our day to day lives will be archived and saved. What’s more, these archives will be available over the net for recollection, analysis, even sharing.

    And we will be doing it to ourselves.

    This won't simply be a world of a single, governmental Big Brother watching over your shoulder, nor will it be a world of a handful of corporate siblings training their ever-vigilant security cameras and tags on you. Such monitoring may well exist, probably will, in fact, but it will be overwhelmed by the millions of cameras and recorders in the hands of millions of Little Brothers and Little Sisters. We will carry with us the tools of our own transparency, and many, perhaps most, will do so willingly, even happily.

    I call this world the Participatory Panopticon.
    Bonus link by the guy who coined the term:
    http://www.davidbrin.com/privacyarticles.html

    Man, if that wasn't the website of a sci-fi author, my crank-o-meter would go off.
    Last edited by Moses2k; 16th Jul 2007 at 12:49 PM.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator BiG_D's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Inches above the ban button
    Posts
    4,064
    If the archives are open for sharing, and more importantly, if the archives can be corrected if there is an error, then I'd submit we'd be better off than we are now. As bad as it would be to have everything you do recorded, an open, accurate archive is preferable to the inaccurate, private, written-in-stone "security" we have now: no-fly lists, wiretapping, et al.
    It's not my fault everything you like is terrible.

  7. #7
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    The basic argument is taking open-source into the future, with decreasing size and cost of cameras and increases in storage space, perpetual sousveillence becomes fairly unstoppable. You record and share and watch the watchers, and so on.

    The real question is where to have your privacy. Encrypted communication will still be necessary, and for personal relaxation and 'private activities' there, IMO, should be laws protecting against surveillance of protected rooms on private property (with blinds drawn, etc.) from sensors on the property...but then, what stops someone from actively scanning with ultrasound, terahertz, TEMPEST-like, or otherwise from off the property? Not sure what I think of this yet.

  8. #8
    Member Baz's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    0xbaadf00d
    Posts
    3,094
    If everyone goes on the record we'll become a planet of politicians! I dig the idea of enforced digital forgetfulness à la what les Europeans are asking of Google.
    Also those who wish to not participate in the panopticon are shit out of luck with millions of other participants panning thier optics on them.
    (me goes and finds a deep dark cave to live in, with plenty of fungus to feast upon)
    ..it's safer here.

  9. #9
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    I think the benefits could outweigh the losses. Accountability of those with power, and possible near-elimination of violent crime being good examples. Problematically, there are a lot of unjust laws around.

    Also, do you really think you have any privacy in public at the moment, or that you should be able to force others not to look at you in public?

  10. #10
    Member Nachimir's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,461
    A while back I concluded that total openness would be the only viable survival strategy in the face of both surveillance and sousveillance, and wrote some about it here, most specifically this post.

    In the same vein but with better reasoning, Danah Boyd is very good on Super Publics:

    A reporter recently asked me why kids today have no shame. I told her it was her fault. Media is obsessed with revealing the backstage of people in the public eye - celebrities, politicians, etc. More recently, they've created a public eye to put people into - Survivor, Real World, etc. Open digital expression systems coupled with global networks took it one step farther by saying that anyone could operate as media and expose anyone else. What's juicy is what people want to hide and thus, the media (all media) goes after this like hawks. Add the post-9/11 attitude that if you hide something, you are clearly a terrorist. Should it surprise anyone that teenagers have responded by exposing everything with pride? What better way to react to a super public where everyone is working as paparazzi? There's nothing juicy about exposing what's already exposed. Do it yourself and you have nothing to worry about. These are the kinds of things that are emerging as people face life in super publics.

  11. #11
    Member Baz's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    0xbaadf00d
    Posts
    3,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Moses2k View Post
    Also, do you really think you have any privacy in public at the moment, or that you should be able to force others not to look at you in public?
    My point is the record of those actions are FOREVER
    "Hey! Remember that time on Tuesday 16 May 2014 when you were drinking with your good buddies and you said how much you liked the umbrella in your beer? We'll I'm sorry but here at the Department for Alternate Rain Preventative Activities we prefer people who are less umbrella inclined. I'm sorry you can't have the job."

    This is the future you envision!
    ..it's safer here.

  12. #12
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    And I'm free to refuse to employ myself anywhere where they're intolerant of umbrella-Americans. Seriously, sousveillance in a democratic society would seem to me to lead to greater tolerance as we all realize what strange and squishy creatures we are all.
    Last edited by Moses2k; 18th Jul 2007 at 01:08 PM.

  13. #13
    Member Nachimir's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,461
    Absolutely. A coworker and I do so much on the web that we frequently run up against the impossibility of comparmentalising all of our values and keeping much of anything hidden from a given social circle anymore.

    My friends are into such diverse stuff in terms of sex/intoxicants/entertainment/religion/politics that I kind of meet difference now and think "So what?". Strange is surprisingly average.

    If someone doesn't want to employ me on the basis of X, that's probably better than them not finding out, then me having to go to the effort of keeping it hidden in order to not go through the hassle of a job hunt. If an employer can accept X (openly or not, but either way without breathing down my neck) that puts me in a much better position psychologically. I'm more likely to be happy at work, and that's to the advantage of my employer too.

    There's so much hidden variance out there that any employer starting on that kind of filtering might actually struggle to employ. Besides Baz, you'd probably find that wanker of a job interviewer has a secret cocktail umbrella basement in Second Life.
    Last edited by Nachimir; 17th Jul 2007 at 04:33 AM.

  14. #14
    Member WhichDoctor's Avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by Moses2k View Post
    Also, do you really think you have any privacy in public at the moment, or that you should be able to force others not to look at you in public?

    This is true, when I’m in town and a bit bored I play the game "spot the CCTV Camera" where I go around counting the number of security cameras watching me at any one time. It's usually no less than two.

    As for the ill-advised use of a umbrella scuppering your chances of getting a job, surely you would be able to do the same to the employer and say “Well I would have loved to work for you but on October 11 2012 you drank a Long Island Iced Tea and I could never work for a man who has ever drunk such a thing” so it wouldn’t be all one way.

    But on balance if it gets to that, I think ill probably take to the hills like Baz. Until the spy drones spot me that is .
    WhichDoctor + online = Mr_Shine

    We put our faith in BLASH HARDCHEESE!

  15. #15
    Super Moderator BiG_D's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Inches above the ban button
    Posts
    4,064
    And here we go.
    Under previous rules, police had to apply for access to the cameras on a case-by-case basis because of concerns that routine use of the information would be an invasion of privacy.

    Under the new rules, anti-terror officers will be able to view pictures in "real time" from Transport for London's (Tfl) 1,500 cameras, which use Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology to link cars with owners' details.
    So, how long until they're free to use the information for whatever they feel like? (Or how long until someone starts abusing the new rules, anyway?)
    It's not my fault everything you like is terrible.

  16. #16
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    How do you see that info being abused? Officers checking for cheating spouses? They are traffic cops after all. If surveillance scares you, and perhaps it should, match it.

    Watch the watchers. Inform people about the possibilities for and benefits of sousveillance. Inform your government rep. Insist on open government. Carry a camera (phone) with you.

  17. #17
    Super Moderator BiG_D's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Inches above the ban button
    Posts
    4,064
    More worrying is them putting technology in place for mundane things like traffic control, but slowly turning it into a surveillance device by exempting themselves from their own rules. In this case we heard about it, which is good. But how many times has it went unannounced?

    And what good is sousveillance if the watchers refuse to be watched?
    It's not my fault everything you like is terrible.

  18. #18
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    Civil disobedience, and make people aware of the idiocy and unsustainability of this.

  19. #19
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzz/Religious_Action_Figures

    I'd like to see that bastard try!

  20. #20
    Member Baz's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    0xbaadf00d
    Posts
    3,094
    Now all they need is a cartoon to sell the product.
    ..it's safer here.

  21. #21
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    Like this?

  22. #22
    Member Ki!ler-Mk1's Avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Boston, England
    Posts
    2,013
    Quote Originally Posted by Moses2k View Post



    Thats pretty funny, are we allowed to post intresting links from wikipedia?

  23. #23
    Member Fuzzy Bunny's Avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2004
    Location
    In before Moses
    Posts
    4,002
    Such as this?

  24. #24
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    So then, what would an extra-jocular implant look like?

  25. #25
    Member Baz's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    0xbaadf00d
    Posts
    3,094
    My foot in your ass! Oh snap!
    So yeah I'm thinking I might get a dayglo starfield extraoccular implant.
    ..it's safer here.

  26. #26
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674

  27. #27
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEjMcAVlgvs

    I know who I'm voting for.

  28. #28
    Member Moses2k's Avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Was actually here before Fuzz
    Posts
    5,674
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6Z6X...elated&search=

    Are you a bad enough dude to watch this commercial?

  29. #29
    Member Narayan's Avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    44
    Non Active Player, Non Active Forummer. :/ Guess I'm just waiting for Infested.

  30. #30
    Member Aggamemnon's Avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,373
    It's all well and good, saying with so much watching and recording and checking up...
    It's all (possibly) great in theory, but it's never so easy practically. Most places have hundreds of cameras, and only a handful of people actually watching.
    Granted, reporting something that will potentially have video evidence is a good compliment to security etc. But realtime, it's never very effective.

    Take a busy city every weekend, countless small scuffles, abuses, petty crimes and outright acts of violence and victimization go un-noticed, and unreported every week.
    More often than not, when it is noticed and when police etc are alerted, by the time they arrive on scene it's already over with and the involved parties (or typically just the aggressors) are already gone.

    Example recently, outside a fast food bar, two lads started a random fight (for the sake of it I assume) tried to mame/seriously injure other lads just to do it.
    By the time the police did arrive, they had the chance to start up with a totally seperate, and random party and still be far enough away to escape the arms of the law.

    As for all the political and anti-terror stuff, get's even more complicated. It's good to be secure, but how do you target effectively?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. A rather interesting poll
    By Carth in forum Community Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 27th Aug 2006, 04:54 PM
  2. Interesting day
    By Convict in forum Community Chat
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12th Jul 2004, 04:47 PM
  3. Try this! (Old Hat possibility) But interesting
    By tundra in forum Community Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 29th Aug 2003, 08:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •