Ask Lemmy

I'm more so afraid of the AI detection and algorithms that the cameras are connected to. A simple camera can turn in to 1984 in no time.

At intersections, front porches, dashcams, on policemen. Not in schools (is it even legal to videotape children like that?) Not on public sidewalks.

I understand them in private businesses, too. But a network of surveillance, no.

I was just thinking about this the other day. Cameras can be a powerful tool, but in the same way as an axe is a powerful tool. It's all about whose hands wield them, and to what end. I'm loathe to prohibit them as often they are the most reliable witness to events, but I also don't trust essentially anyone to wield their power on a day to day basis. Companies want to use them to collect data for marketing purposes. Governments want to use them to suppress dissent. People want them because they are marketed as making you safer, but most people would probably get as much benefit from a fake security camera as from the most expensive real camera. The systems can become harmful themselves without careful setup and maintenance due to malicious actors. (mirai) How do you empower beneficial uses without empowering malicious ones? I don't really have an answer. I just recognize it as another facet in the larger question of proliferation of powerful tools.

I'm a privacy advocate, but I do not believe that the cameras themselves are the main threat to privacy, and do not necessarily have a problem with cameras placed in any of the locations you listed, given the following conditions:

The camera system is closed circuit with the footage stored securely on a device on the premises, not connected to or stored on the internet, not combined and analyzed automatically/algorithmically with other footage and data, and the footage is deleted or overwritten after a reasonable period of time.

I believe the main threats to privacy involve how the footage is stored and analyzed.

I do not mind them like at the crossroads or around the traffic signs, bus or railway stations, airports, museums, etc. But, if it is like every 5 metres... Even if it is said it is for security reason... I do not know... It feels more like recording everything I do

I'm a big proponent of police body cams.

Depends what you do with the information. I dont care if a hotel wants to surveil me moving around their building. But I do care when large networks of security cameras track my movement throughout a city.

I dont expect full privacy walking into different shops and through trainstations but I expect those to just be there to review footage if something goes bad. No face scanning no sketchy shit.

CCTV is fine in my opinion, what isn't fine is flock cameras being used on a national level tracking hundreds of millions of people.

My problems with surveillance is not being surveiled but how that information is used. Surveillance is just a tool and, like weapons, are neither inherently good nor bad.

Cameras I'm ok with, facial recognition and all that other bullshit I'm not ok with though. Camera feeds are good for piecing together accidents and stuff like that but companies shouldn't be able to track down all of your personal information just because you walked into their shop with facial recognition scanners at the door.

imo I should be for real time observation and referencing a specific thing.

I've worked in places that had to have cameras everywhere but also had strict prohibition on viewing the archived data, because it was in a hospital setting. and people's privacy was a legal issue

i don't think it should be used to monitor people without cause basically

Only cameras for very sensitive areas should be actually monitored.

For anything else, the rule should be recording only and then deleting after 48 or 72 hours unless something important happened.

On private property: up to owner as long as they don't record what is going on outside the property. Notify about recording with signs.

Public spaces: only if there is a good reason to.

On privat property. Trainstations and airports. Museums and other collections.

When i was in the UK i was shocked how there are cameras everywhere

honestly theres an argument for putting a camera anywhere, dont want kids to smoke in the halls before class? install a camera. do you want insurance and justice after a home invasion or burglary? install a security system, honestly the only places where its unacceptable to install a camera is in any type of restroom, or personal spaces like a bedroom, there also shouldn't be cameras in places like private offices or places where people will be less productive at the thought of being watched.

also no excessive camera use by the government in public spaces, but private property in that public space makes sense, like a coffe shop, or a mall.

I’m ok if they are used to extend surveillance and actively prevent a problem. For example in a shop to block shoplifters or in a swimming pool to spot someone drowning.

I find them a lazy and often useless solution in most of the other cases. It’s nice to have the video of a robbery or a car accident to investigate later, but I don’t want the robbery or the accident to happen in the first place. Imagine the case of an homicide: it’s cool to catch the killer, but the victim remains dead. Cameras are a cheap “solution” to have the illusion of control.

Plus: the whole face recognition thing is going to be a huge problem in the future in the less-democratic countries.

Looking at other comments, clearly I'm in the minority that I simply feel watched when there's a camera that I know is aimed at me right now. I can't know if someone's watching, or watching it back later. I'm not doing anything nefarious, not more than picking my nose perhaps, but it's not like everyone's given a feed of all cameras that exist either. Clearly people don't want to just be watched insofar as it is avoidable

Most of the time I don't know that a camera is filming me and ignorance is bliss. And obviously facial recognition and license plate scanning, as mentioned in other comments, goes even further. But I'm also simply not super happy with the ubiquity of cameras on every street and every publicly accessible place and vehicle you use, even if I see their benefits as well

anything involving government bodies. on the police, at the postal service, in the senators office. they should not eat sleep or shit without the tax payers knowing how long and what color.

but nowhere else that isn't regulated by law or funded by taxes. yes if government is doing inspections there. No if Jimmy Grocery Store manager wants to be able to review footage of a workplace injury.

I want full government transparency but no surveillance industry

Put them everywhere.