Tracking People's Behavior with Algorithms (Smart CCTV)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of using algorithms in smart CCTV systems for tracking people's behavior. Participants explore the ethical, social, and security-related aspects of surveillance technology, particularly in the context of its deployment in Britain.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern about the disturbing nature of surveillance technology and its Orwellian implications, particularly in Britain.
  • Others argue that the deployment of cameras in public spaces can be acceptable and may have proven effective in certain areas.
  • There are doubts about the effectiveness of the "Samurai" system without advanced AI, with concerns about false positives and the potential for misidentifying suspicious behavior.
  • Some participants worry that reliance on such systems could lead to complacency in security measures, particularly in sensitive areas like airports and subways.
  • There is a discussion about the balance between security from individual threats and the potential overreach of government surveillance powers.
  • Some participants suggest that the implementation of such technologies could lead to a gradual acceptance of intrusive monitoring as the norm.
  • Concerns are raised about the long-term implications of increased government power and the difficulty of reversing such changes once they are established.
  • Others highlight the importance of public discourse on how surveillance technologies are implemented to protect individual rights.
  • There is a mention of the potential for harassment of innocent individuals by authorities rather than effective prevention of crime.
  • Some participants question the real threat posed by organized government in Western nations compared to individual threats, suggesting that increased scrutiny and transparency may mitigate concerns.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of smart CCTV systems. While some find value in surveillance for crime prevention, others raise significant ethical concerns and question the effectiveness and potential consequences of such technologies. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of balancing security needs with civil liberties, and the discussion reflects uncertainty about the future implications of surveillance technologies in society.

Galteeth
Messages
69
Reaction score
1
Last edited:
Computer science news on Phys.org
You know I don't mind so much if my city streets had cameras deployed. I think it's an O.K. idea actually. As far as I know the system has worked out well for the streets it covers in Britain.

I'm not exactly sure how this "Samurai" system would benefit anybody without some sort of high-leveled AI system that could replace human intelligence on the situation. It would appear to me that many false-positives would be relayed just by people acting sketchy in regular life. And it would probably also not be able to pick up all that many people who may commit acts of violence just based on how they are walking or through their actions.

What I would be most afraid of is people thinking that the system is good enough to be RELIED upon to catch these people. It would in my opinion create a more slack environment; that is definitely not good for security of an area suchas an airport or subway system.
 
Sorry! said:
You know I don't mind so much if my city streets had cameras deployed. I think it's an O.K. idea actually. As far as I know the system has worked out well for the streets it covers in Britain.

I'm not exactly sure how this "Samurai" system would benefit anybody without some sort of high-leveled AI system that could replace human intelligence on the situation. It would appear to me that many false-positives would be relayed just by people acting sketchy in regular life. And it would probably also not be able to pick up all that many people who may commit acts of violence just based on how they are walking or through their actions.

What I would be most afraid of is people thinking that the system is good enough to be RELIED upon to catch these people. It would in my opinion create a more slack environment; that is definitely not good for security of an area suchas an airport or subway system.

In the article it sounds like the idea is to develop some sort of rudimentay AI. When it comes to these types of measures, while one in isolation is not necessarily cause for alarm, the combination of multiple tracks (as in Britian, where you have acoustic weapons being used to keep teenagers from loitering, CCTV on every street, and the increased use of RFID) a cultural shift takes place where people gradually begin to accept more and more intrusive monitoring as the norm. This may not be an issue yet, but it certainly sows the seeds for trouble. What happens after these systems are implemented and the relative peace and prosperity of Britian are disrupted? (as for a hypothetical example, as the result of climate change). It is much easier to give a government power then it is to roll it back.

As far as your conclusion, I agree. It seems like any terrorist worth their salt would know enough not to act overtly suspicious anyway. It seems far more likely the result will be the harassment of easier targets by lower level officials (as is often the case here with TSA or the police) then the apprehension of truly dangerous people.
 
Galteeth said:
It is much easier to give a government power then it is to roll it back.
It is much better to compromise and have a say in the inevitable than to fight it and have no say when it arrives. This sort of technology is coming, it will happen, and the only question is whether or not the people on the side of your rights will have any say in how it is implemented and controlled to better preserve your rights. As you say, once government seizes its power it will not let it go easily.

Galteeth said:
As far as your conclusion, I agree. It seems like any terrorist worth their salt would know enough not to act overtly suspicious anyway. It seems far more likely the result will be the harassment of easier targets by lower level officials (as is often the case here with TSA or the police) then the apprehension of truly dangerous people.
I think that most bombers (especially suicide bombers) are newbies and likely to be more nervous. Besides, I doubt that it is intended solely for terrorist activity much like I doubt that my country's NSA data mining project is solely intended to target terrorists.
 
Galteeth said:
I wasn't suggesting that CCTV was never useful in fighting crime. The question of course is the classic one of the balance between security from the threat posed by individuals and security from the threat posed by organized government.

What would be the least undesirable option?
accepting:
- the threat posed by individuals
- or, the threat posed by organized government

In China it is different situation but I don't know how real the second threat can be in the case of the Western nations ...
This may not be an issue yet, but it certainly sows the seeds for trouble. What happens after these systems are implemented and the relative peace and prosperity of Britian are disrupted? (as for a hypothetical example, as the result of climate change). It is much easier to give a government power then it is to roll it back.

I see that you agreed that the threat from organized government is not real as for now. I think you are ignoring the push for transparency in the governments and increased scrutiny of the government activities by the media. Thus, I disagree with your conclusion about the future.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

News Post-Scientific Technocratic Methodologies
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Why do so many people hate science?
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
12K
Thoughts on A.I. and Self-Preservation
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Programs Environmental Solutions and Semiconductors: Research Interests and Career Goals
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Programs Math minor, double major, and elective classes advice
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
The Scientist as Hero - or not
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 226)
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 226)
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
A sci-fi trilogy background. real science advice needed PLEASE
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Graduate BRS: PKI Cryptosystems for SA/Ms: A Tutorial
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K