|
|
|
|
|
by stefantalpalaru
3864 days ago
|
|
Mass surveillance is effective for gathering data about the past of a certain target so you can blackmail them. It's obviously not effective in preventing anything. There's just too much data to analyze and keyword based searches are a weak tool. You also need to realize that people that were doing unpleasant surveillance in parked cars, at night, trying to figure out what a known arms dealer was up to, are now enjoying the comfort of a desk, looking at a database of intercepted SMSes that don't make any sense, and waiting for the shift to end. |
|
There is also another case which is finding out who did it - and in recent reports of police investigations there is always about use of surveillance cameras. The surety of being caught is also important in prevention. Maybe less in the case of suicide terrorists - but they are really a minority of all crime.
I have the feeling that people are so much against surveillance that they cannot stand any analysis of the arguments used. This is counterproductive.