[carapace]

Let me be clear that I am not advocating for constant ubiquitous surveillance. Only I don't see a way to avoid it happening. There may be a severe disruption in civilization what with the climate and all, but one day "there will be lemon-soaked paper napkins."

At best you can try to limit who has the surveillance tech, but to do that you have to have the surveillance tech, eh? The problem is circular.

So, since we cannot (I believe) do without the surveillance, can we remove the chilling effect?

For example, in Star Trek the computer always knew where everyone was (unless the script called for a mysterious disappearance) and no one felt stifled, eh?

[dmix]

We already have a warrant system in place that is more than adequate for protecting privacy and excessive dragnet fishing expeditions.

I don’t see why modern surveillance is allowed to bypass these laws in the name of security or w/e goal. When it’s clear investigators have more than enough to work with, just justify it first in court to a justice or judge.

Secret courts are extremely dangerous precedent too and basically defeats the whole purpose.

[staplers]

The founding fathers literally said we have to use lethal violence against those who want to restrict our freedom in this exact scenario.

Take that as you will. Their method worked.

[clubm8]

>We already have a warrant system in place that is more than adequate for protecting privacy and excessive dragnet fishing expeditions.

Do you have a citation for that claim?

There are vast[1] systems in place that violate laws and norms, so much so the IETF has labeled pervasive monitoring as an "attack"[2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosure... [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7258

[dmix]

None of the things you linked to use the traditional warrant system. Particularly the whole FISA system and our terrorist laws here in Canada which sidestepped criminal courts entirely.

[clubm8]

not really sure what your point is so maybe you can clarify: are you saying it's ok to have a separate type of warrant for terrorists?

"traditional warrant system" is not a legal term. FISA warrants are warrants. Highly problematic, but warrants.

You may be interested in reading about how even FISA felt the NSA overstepped:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/d7axey/this-is-the-secret...

[carapace]

How do the good guys ensure that the bad guys aren't abusing the tech without using it themselves?

[PavlovsCat]

> I don't see a way to avoid it happening

Civil society outnumbers spooks by how much, and who needs who, who is paying for who? Simply withdrawing support and tax money could end it rather quickly.

I can't tell you how to organize people to do that, but it could actually just happen anytime, just a fluke, everybody wakes up in the morning and thinks enough is enough. High-tech requires constant, expensive maintenance, It's not like, say, a giant stone structure you can leave unattended for a few years or even decades.

[carapace]

> who needs who

We need them. That's why we pay them.

> everybody wakes up in the morning and thinks enough is enough.

And then? Do they tear down the machines and all the "spooks" are tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail? How do the farm animals know the pigs are not becoming humans? ("Animal Farm" reference, in case it's not clear.) How do you know bad guys aren't building and using spook-tech?

For example, do the drug cartels voluntarily give up their gear in this scenario?

[PavlovsCat]

> And then? Do they tear down the machines and all the "spooks" are tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail?

How is that relevant? I refuted the claim that nothing can be done.

[carapace]

For the sake of argument, let's say I'm wrong and you're right: ubiquitous surveillance is a genie that can be re-bottled.

You still aren't addressing my main point: How do we know, going forward, that no one is rubbing that lamp? Someone has to guard the lamp, eh?

Unless you're postulating some sort of post-historical world-wide Golden Age (which I am down to discuss!) there are still going to be people smart enough and wicked enough to use tech to spy and connive, etc.