# Are you OK with a real life "Eye of Sauron" for mass surveillance? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 28, 2015, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739 "2015-06-28T22:39:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Smartass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@Smartass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smartass)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/82 "2015-06-30T16:25:51Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > If something is illegal, then if you get caught you should pay the penalty. If the act shouldn’t be illegal, then the law should be changed. (IMO, all drugs should be legal). For me, personally, this is the key point. Right now, there ARE way too many things that are illegal–so many, that none of us really know what they all are. And I haven’t seen anything that suggests this is going to change for the better. So, I generally believe that you can pick any human and watch them continuously for a month or so, and you’ll find something you could nail them for. Which means that the potential for abuse is there. So, I think the central question is how optimistic we are that the system won’t be abused (or how much abuse we’d be willing to tolerate to get the benefits). Personally, I’m just not all that optimistic. I’ve seen too many ways that the existing infrastructure is abused. Heard anything about the way police abuse asset forfeiture laws to convict and impound people’s money? -VM ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/83 "2015-06-30T16:28:50Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Please. You can’t place limits or oversight on spy agencies and expect them to be followed. Their entire job description is doing illegal shit, not getting caught doing it and keeping everything they do super compartmentalized. And of course, every nation needs their spooks a lot more than the spooks need their home government (black financing and whatnot, plus a very valuable skillset in high demand across the globe), which means any punishment must perforce be light or even symbolic, since you don’t want your spooks to turn against you or, worse, disgruntedly start giving away your secret shit to the highest bidder. Pardon me for saying this but this is bordering on conspiracy theory. Do you have a cite for rampant CIA/NSA illegal procedures that have any real impact on American society? I agree that there is _potential_ for misuse but there is the potential for misuse in many police/security procedures. Right now cops could legally invade your home…if they have a warrant. The Feds can tap your phone any time they want…if they have a warrant. The cops can stop you on the street and search you if they believe they have probable cause. These techniques could be abused (and occasionally are) but largely oversight works and they are important for solving crimes. The eye in the sky has the potential to be revolutionary in solving crimes. Let’s come up with procedures that will help allay your concerns so we can use it. > [@Kobal2](#): > > What did it take to make the government take steps to curb the NSA ? Ed Snowden going public with the shenanigans, giving them no other choice but to at least pretend like they were in control. How often does that happen, and can you rely on an Edward Snowden to keep you posted on what the NSA does with the Eye of Sauron ? And of course, that it took an Edward Snowden is quite telling in the first place - either the government was previously unaware of what was going on ; or they were and didn’t give a shit. Are you comfortable with either proposition ? Actually, yes. While I am troubled by the data collection as cited by Snowden I have not heard of any instances where the data was actually used against Americans; do you have any cites that say otherwise? If I understand it correctly the data being collected was meta data and not easily tracked to any particular person. The way I see it is that a secret meta collection project that wasn’t actually used against anybody was uncovered which created a fire-storm, leading to at least curtailment if not abandonment. Isn’t this a demonstration of the system working? > [@Ravenman](#): > > The Fourth Amendment requires that people be free from searches that are unreasonable. I guess we differ on our understanding of “unreasonable”. Cops can invade your home if they get a warrant so our society feels that is reasonable (with a warrant). Given the potential utility of the eye in the sky I think it reasonable with some safe-guards in place, not unlike home invasions. I’d like to see a short-term pilot program that we could study to determine how effective the eye could be. If it turned out to be ineffective then there’s no point in implementing it. ---
**Author:** ![Smartass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@Smartass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smartass)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/84 "2015-06-30T16:43:06Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Hypothetical discussion about the ideal way to handle situations see, well, dishonest, for lack of a better word. Unless real world situations are applied, it’s really not discussing, not to have a real, honest discussion. This is fair, but you have to take in both sides of the “real life” consequences. Let’s imagine that you’re protesting against the confederate flag in SC, and while you’re out waving your sign, your filmed littering or something, and next thing you know, you’re getting arrested for something that is illegal but usually ignored. Maybe they track back and find a whole list of things you’ve done over the past week (traffic violations, jay walking, whatever) and bust you for all these violations at once. In that case, would you be in favor of constant surveillance, or would you feel like you’ve been violated? So, the question is not whether it would be good to solve and punish the crimes you’re referring to. The question is whether that good will outweigh the everyday harms that might come with the solution. I would say that the “good” you’re referring to is very good, but also relatively infrequent in practice; whereas, the “bad” abuses may not be as bad in any single event, but there will be a lot MORE of them. -VM ---
**Author:** ![Smartass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@Smartass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smartass)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/85 "2015-06-30T16:58:02Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I don’t find the slippery slope argument persuasive in this instance. You could make the above argument about a large number of police activity: e.g. if we let them lock up criminals they’ll come after us next. I’m willing to nix techniques of dubious value based on slippery slope but the “eye” technology seems like it has such potential that its utility outweighs potential harm. Well, pretty much every police power gets abused to some extent. I’m not saying that that the slippery slope extends down to an Orwellian Big Brother or Stalin’s purges. I AM saying we have to think how far down the slope we WILL go, and whether that’s an acceptable trade-off. For me, there’s just such a tremendous _potential_ for abuse here that it’s scary. It’s been pointed out a couple of times, but those “in favor” haven’t really responded: It’s this back-tracking ability that’s really scary. Right now, in big cities, you may be recorded constantly, but it’s hard enough to ID you that they aren’t likely to try to unless you’ve done something big. The ability to easily track you back to your house means that the biggest impediment to abuse (anonymity in the crowd) is eliminated. Unless you’re REALLY good, once they’ve pinpointed you, they can figure out who you are and where you live, without getting out of their chairs. I think it’s way to easy to understate what a game-changer this ability is in the world of general population surveillance. No one will be as “lost in the crowd” as they used to be. -VM ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Lowry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sam\_Lowry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Lowry)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/86 "2015-06-30T19:32:44Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > I think what people from really large cities are trying to tell you is: > > 1- The Government watching you is going to happen, whether you like it or not, they will be > 2- After a while you get used to the cameras There’s a big difference between being filmed by a bunch of separate cameras throughout the day in different places, as opposed to being constantly filmed by one camera in the sky with one database that stores all the info. It’s like the difference between seeing a bunch of different people at all the places I go to throughout the day, and one guy following me from place to place everywhere I go. > [@Deeg](#): > > Interesting point. I don’t think reigning in crime-fighting techniques is the way to go, though. We could lower prison populations by getting rid of cops. I’d like to think that long-term something like the eye could reduce prison populations: my understanding is that the best deterrent to crime is the belief that one will be caught and caught soon. That’s true, that [thinking one will get caught is a great deterrent to crime](http://nij.gov/five-things/pages/deterrence.aspx). It’s just we have to decide if the possible trade offs will be worth it. > [@Robert163](#): > > You are being way too self centered, in the anthropomorphic way. It SEEMS like having your every move digitally recorded is horrible, but, it’s not. You are far too insignificant for some cop or spy to sit there and watch your every move all day. Even petty criminals would not merit this level of scrutiny or continued observation. You’d have to be a major criminal to have someone watch your every move, all day, every day. You, as an individual, would be lucky to have someone even pay attention to you at all. Right now it would be too much of a hassle for the police to continually observe me. The police could track all my phone records, and find surveillance video from all the stores and businesses I go to or pass by during the day, but it would take a lot of work, and there’s no reason for them to do it to me, or to most anyone who isn’t a major criminal. But if there’s an Eye of Sauron in the sky, it might not be any trouble at all. If there’s a rally regarding something like Ferguson, it sounds like it wouldn’t be much trouble for the police to see who all was there, and backtrack a few days and see that this person littered, this person did a whole lot of speeding, this other person bought some drugs, and so on. Then the police can go to all those people’s workplaces, arrest them, and take their time booking them, and try to scare off people from holding another rally like that again. > [@Smartass](#): > > Which means that the potential for abuse is there. So, I think the central question is how optimistic we are that the system won’t be abused (or how much abuse we’d be willing to tolerate to get the benefits). Personally, I’m just not all that optimistic. I’ve seen too many ways that the existing infrastructure is abused. Heard anything about the way police abuse asset forfeiture laws to convict and impound people’s money? The asset forfeiture laws being abused is a perfect example of a reasonable law being abused. I believe John Oliver had a segment on it a while ago if anyone wants to see more about that. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/87 "2015-06-30T20:08:19Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Pardon me for saying this but this is bordering on conspiracy theory. Do you have a cite for rampant CIA/NSA illegal procedures that have any real impact on American society? What, [the CIA funnelling crack into black ghettos](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html) back in the 80s wasn’t all that impactful, d’you reckon ? Beyond that I don’t think it’s exactly paranoid to suspect that organizations whose business it is to run clandestine, illicit operations might just be conducting clandestine, illicit operations :p. > [@](#): > > I agree that there is _potential_ for misuse but there is the potential for misuse in many police/security procedures. Right now cops could legally invade your home…if they have a warrant. The Feds can tap your phone any time they want…if they have a warrant. Actually, part of the fallout of Snowden’s revelations/people thrown under the bus were a number of intelligence mooks who tapped or otherwise illegally surveyed their girlfriends, neighbours etc… They didn’t have a warrant to do so, should go without saying. > [@](#): > > The eye in the sky has the potential to be revolutionary in solving crimes. Let’s come up with procedures that will help allay your concerns so we can use it. Let the video feeds and analysis tools be wholly public. That way, no political entity or nefarious actor can use them for shenanigans without fear of retaliation. Worked for nukes, neh ? When everybody watches everybody, nobody watches anybody or something :). > [@](#): > > Actually, yes. While I am troubled by the data collection as cited by Snowden I have not heard of any instances where the data was actually used against Americans; do you have any cites that say otherwise? Again, a quick google on “NSA stalk girlfriend” should illuminate. And, once again, those are the people thrown under the bus because their illegal snooping couldn’t possibly fall under national interest. > [@](#): > > If I understand it correctly the data being collected was meta data and not easily tracked to any particular person. The way I see it is that a secret meta collection project that wasn’t actually used against anybody was uncovered which created a fire-storm, leading to at least curtailment if not abandonment. Isn’t this a demonstration of the system working? Do you have any proof that it \*was \*abandoned or curtailed ? I don’t mean public declarations and PR communiqués of such, I mean positive indication that it is true. [QUOTE=Sam Lowry] But if there’s an Eye of Sauron in the sky, it might not be any trouble at all. If there’s a rally regarding something like Ferguson, it sounds like it wouldn’t be much trouble for the police to see who all was there, and backtrack a few days and see that this person littered, this person did a whole lot of speeding, this other person bought some drugs, and so on. Then the police can go to all those people’s workplaces, arrest them, and take their time booking them, and try to scare off people from holding another rally like that again. [/QUOTE] Ayup. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/88 "2015-06-30T20:13:19Z")
> [@Smartass](#): > > For me, there’s just such a tremendous _potential_ for abuse here that it’s scary. It’s been pointed out a couple of times, but those “in favor” haven’t really responded: It’s this back-tracking ability that’s really scary. Right now, in big cities, you may be recorded constantly, but it’s hard enough to ID you that they aren’t likely to try to unless you’ve done something big. The ability to easily track you back to your house means that the biggest impediment to abuse (anonymity in the crowd) is eliminated. Unless you’re REALLY good, once they’ve pinpointed you, they can figure out who you are and where you live, without getting out of their chairs. As the technology stands, they could identify that \*someone \* left your place of work, and traveled to your home between 5:07 and 5:39 p.m. They wouldn’t know it was you necessarily. It could be your wife, your kid, or your buddy who is coming over to play Call of Duty. They’d still have to have a real-live cop identify you as being the person who got out of the car at 5:38, and walked into the house. That’s why I’m not so worried yet; the nefarious uses are still pretty small, and the positive uses are great- for example it strikes me that using this kind of technology could drastically improve traffic flow in conjunction with those street signs that can be changed with traffic conditions. They’d be able to get a lot better idea of traffic patterns in a sort of holistic way, that wouldn’t be possible by looking at street cameras and drive-over sensors. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Lowry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sam\_Lowry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Lowry)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/89 "2015-06-30T20:25:15Z")
> [@bump](#): > > As the technology stands, they could identify that \*someone \* left your place of work, and traveled to your home between 5:07 and 5:39 p.m. They wouldn’t know it was you necessarily. It could be your wife, your kid, or your buddy who is coming over to play Call of Duty. > > They’d still have to have a real-live cop identify you as being the person who got out of the car at 5:38, and walked into the house. > > That’s why I’m not so worried yet; the nefarious uses are still pretty small, and the positive uses are great- for example it strikes me that using this kind of technology could drastically improve traffic flow in conjunction with those street signs that can be changed with traffic conditions. They’d be able to get a lot better idea of traffic patterns in a sort of holistic way, that wouldn’t be possible by looking at street cameras and drive-over sensors. Would they need to have a real-live cop identify that it was specifically you? Or could they just ask you to come in for questioning and hope they asked the right person? Or threaten to throw your wife in jail unless you admit to having done the crime. In a perfect world where the cops acted correctly, this wouldn’t be an issue, but we know the cops don’t always act correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/90 "2015-06-30T21:20:50Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > . . . maybe you can give me an actual example of why it is bad. Not a term like freedom or privacy or civil rights but an actual example of why you object. Maybe you can tell me what two plus two is. Not a term like four… Privacy and civil rights are the reasons I’m opposed. > [@Uzi](#): > > I’m still not sure what freedom you think is being given up. Can you provide examples of how a video camera would prevent you from doing anything you are legally allowed to do? . . . It exposes people to open scrutiny, which, by and large, we avoid today by being “a face in the crowd.” It makes me “Trionpus Debatehammer, 772-00-2222, 1278 Greenglass Lane, Democrat” in the crowd. It doesn’t prevent me from acting, but it infringes on my liberty. Freedom consists of more than the right to do things; it also consists of the right not to be involved and entailed. To me, this idea is roughly the same as the idea of the NRA recording the destination of everyone’s phone calls. It intrudes too far into our privacy. > [@](#): > > [re having our names printed on ID badges visible at all times] An excellent idea. I’m not good on remembering people’s names. It would definitely have that social advantage. And it’s quite common in the workplace, and I never really saw any down side to it there. But at all times? Dunno. I guess I’m not strongly against it, but would still vote against it. An idea can be bad without being really really bad. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/91 "2015-06-30T21:25:25Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > What, [the CIA funnelling crack into black ghettos](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html) back in the 80s wasn’t all that impactful, d’you reckon ? . . . Never really proven, alas. I believe it happened, but the solid proof was never brought forward. The CIA did a good enough job of covering their tracks…or maybe I’m wrong and it didn’t actually happen. Either way, there was never the necessary “smoking gun” of undeniable evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/92 "2015-06-30T22:10:25Z")
For the rest of this conversation I’m going to use the term Skyeye out of convenience. > [@Smartass](#): > > Let’s imagine that you’re protesting against the confederate flag in SC, and while you’re out waving your sign, your filmed littering or something, and next thing you know, you’re getting arrested for something that is illegal but usually ignored. Maybe they track back and find a whole list of things you’ve done over the past week (traffic violations, jay walking, whatever) and bust you for all these violations at once. In that case, would you be in favor of constant surveillance, or would you feel like you’ve been violated? > [@Sam\_Lowry](#): > > Would they need to have a real-live cop identify that it was specifically you? Or could they just ask you to come in for questioning and hope they asked the right person? Or threaten to throw your wife in jail unless you admit to having done the crime. In a perfect world where the cops acted correctly, this wouldn’t be an issue, but we know the cops don’t always act correctly. If the cops want to harass you for participating in a protest they don’t need Skyeye to do it. They can just pretend that they saw you littering and bust you for that. They don’t need Skyeye to threaten to throw your wife in jail. If the cops aren’t running rampantly now I don’t see how Skyeye makes a difference. How about this as a restriction: Skyeye can’t be used as evidence to open a investigation. In your traffic violations example it would be void because there is no other evidence. That, plus a restriction on pixel resolution, would alleviate a lot of your concerns. > [@Smartass](#): > > I would say that the “good” you’re referring to is very good, but also relatively infrequent in practice; whereas, the “bad” abuses may not be as bad in any single event, but there will be a lot MORE of them. I look at it completely different: any additional abuse provided by Skyeye (over current ways that law enforcement could abuse you) is trivial compared to the way it could be used to fight crime. The Dayton example from the podcast was amazing: they were able to catch the thief in almost real-time (with all the evidence) which prevented a potentially lengthy, fruitless investigation. Another point: keep in mind that Skyeye would keep tabs on the cops as well. For example, would it have made a difference in the Ferguson case? > [@Kobal2](#): > > What, [the CIA funnelling crack into black ghettos](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html) back in the 80s wasn’t all that impactful, d’you reckon ? And now we’ve crossed over into CT. Too bad we didn’t have Skyeye for the JFK assassination. That might have shut people up about the grassy knoll. ---
**Author:** ![Smartass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@Smartass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smartass)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2015, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/93 "2015-06-30T23:50:04Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > How about this as a restriction: Skyeye can’t be used as evidence to open a investigation. I think this is a good idea. For me, it’s not enough to move into the “in favor” column–for the various reasons being discussed–but still a good idea. -VM ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/94 "2015-07-01T00:29:09Z")
> [@Smartass](#): > > Let’s imagine that you’re protesting against the confederate flag in SC, and while you’re out waving your sign, your filmed littering or something, and next thing you know, you’re getting arrested for something that is illegal but usually ignored. Litterers are the some of the worst people on the planet and you should be fined for it. > [@](#): > > Maybe they track back and find a whole list of things you’ve done over the past week (traffic violations, jay walking, whatever) and bust you for all these violations at once. In that case, would you be in favor of constant surveillance, or would you feel like you’ve been violated? You do realize that these are crimes that are illegal even if no one notices you doing them? Maybe you should learn how to drive, and cross the road at a crosswalk. > [@](#): > > The question is whether that good will outweigh the everyday harms that might come with the solution. So far the harms you have listed is you getting caught for breaking laws that you feel don’t apply to you. > [@](#): > > Unless you’re REALLY good, once they’ve pinpointed you, they can figure out who you are and where you live, without getting out of their chairs. You pay the police to do their jobs. If one cop can solve 10X crimes by video surveillance vs a single cop walking around only solving X, then that is a good thing. > [@](#): > > I think it’s way to easy to understate what a game-changer this ability is in the world of general population surveillance. No one will be as “lost in the crowd” as they used to be. Again, your concerns seem to be that you can’t break laws without someone seeing you do it. > [@Sam\_Lowry](#): > > But if there’s an Eye of Sauron in the sky, it might not be any trouble at all. If there’s a rally regarding something like Ferguson, it sounds like it wouldn’t be much trouble for the police to see who all was there, and backtrack a few days and see that this person littered, this person did a whole lot of speeding, this other person bought some drugs, and so on. Then the police can go to all those people’s workplaces, arrest them, and take their time booking them, and try to scare off people from holding another rally like that again. You mean arrest them for breaking actual laws. Isn’t that their job? And it is very likely that a cop watching riot videos will be tracking people he sees throwing rocks, breaking windows, looting stores, etc., back to where they came from and while doing so making a list of all the laws that person broke coming and going from the protest. As he should be. He’d also not be looking at every single person at the protest because most of them are protesting peacefully and he doesn’t have infinite time in the day to do so. > [@](#): > > The asset forfeiture laws being abused is a perfect example of a reasonable law being abused. I believe John Oliver had a segment on it a while ago if anyone wants to see more about that. I agree that asset forfeiture is just a scam to get more money by the government. Change it rather than whinge about it. At the same time, using the same video they are collecting could help you prove your innocence. > [@Trinopus](#): > > It doesn’t prevent me from acting, but it infringes on my liberty. Freedom consists of more than the right to do things; it also consists of the right not to be involved and entailed. Your right not to be involved stops when you break the law. It just sounds like a lot of people want to be able to break the law with impunity. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/95 "2015-07-01T00:53:19Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > You pay the police to do their jobs. If one cop can solve 10X crimes by video surveillance vs a single cop walking around only solving X, then that is a good thing. … > > Your right not to be involved stops when you break the law. It just sounds like a lot of people want to be able to break the law with impunity. So if the government recorded every phone call and email, and therefore could solve 100x crimes, you’d support that, right? Only those with something to hide would have anything to fear. ---
**Author:** ![Smartass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@Smartass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smartass)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/96 "2015-07-01T00:54:07Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Your right not to be involved stops when you break the law. It just sounds like a lot of people want to be able to break the law with impunity. You’re failing to acknowledge a rather obvious distinction that’s being made here, which is whether the law is being enforced in an even-handed way. The fact is most people break laws, and we don’t even pretend we’re trying to catch every violator. If the people who DO get caught and punished are the ones who pissed off the wrong cop, this is a problem. To mischaracterize that discussion as “I want to get away with stuff” is to construct a pretty epic straw man. To be clear, it’s not that your point has no merit, it’s that you’re deliberately ignoring mine. -VM ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/97 "2015-07-01T01:04:17Z")
> [@Smartass](#): > > If the people who DO get caught and punished are the ones who pissed off the wrong cop, this is a problem. To mischaracterize that discussion as “I want to get away with stuff” is to construct a pretty epic straw man. This is like the argument some make to the cops when pulled over for speeding, “Why didn’t you pull over that guy, he’s going faster than me!?”. In your scenario, are the charges manufactured or are they things that he’d be charged for if caught normally? If the latter then sucks to be him. Don’t speed, beat your wife, etc. I don’t see how it is a straw man when no one has said why they object to this other than to say they don’t want to get a fine for littering or jaywalking. Some nebulous statement like it violates my rights should have some demonstrated argument or proof on how it does so. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/98 "2015-07-01T01:11:26Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So if the government recorded every phone call and email, and therefore could solve 100x crimes, you’d support that, right? Only those with something to hide would have anything to fear. Do they need a warrant to monitor your private communications now? Do they need a warrant to watch you walk down the street now? If they had a database of all communications and world wide video (and I’d like to see the datacenter that could house that) that was only accessible when a specific crime was being investigated or data mined using algorithms to spot criminal activity that was then flagged for further investigation (still requiring a warrant for humans to view), then I’d have little problem with it. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/99 "2015-07-01T01:24:03Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > If the cops want to harass you for participating in a protest they don’t need Skyeye to do it. They can just pretend that they saw you littering and bust you for that. They don’t need Skyeye to threaten to throw your wife in jail. If the cops aren’t running rampantly now I don’t see how Skyeye makes a difference. But the cops usually don’t know who participated in a mass protest - plenty of faces in the crowd, plenty of masks/hats/shades to go around too. With Skyeye they can identify exactly who it was waving this banner around and know where they live, where they work, where they go to church and who each of their friends are. That’s a lot of quasi-instantaneous information about a face in the crowd. > [@](#): > > How about this as a restriction: Skyeye can’t be used as evidence to open a investigation. In your traffic violations example it would be void because there is no other evidence. That, plus a restriction on pixel resolution, would alleviate a lot of your concerns. How would one enforce a restriction on pixel resolution, exactly ? The hardware’s not really complicated - it’s basically just a camera on a rotodrone. The really gnarly stuff is the analysis software. On the hardware side of things, it seems pretty easy to switch the camera/tele-objective for a better one. If and when evidence caught by the camera has to be provided (e.g. in court, subpoena etc…) it’s just as easy to blur up a pixel-perfect image to within any official, legal bounds. > [@](#): > > I look at it completely different: any additional abuse provided by Skyeye (over current ways that law enforcement could abuse you) is trivial compared to the way it could be used to fight crime. The Dayton example from the podcast was amazing: they were able to catch the thief in almost real-time (with all the evidence) which prevented a potentially lengthy, fruitless investigation. I agree, it’s an extremely powerful tool. Which makes the potential for abuse all the more worrysome - and likely. > [@](#): > > And now we’ve crossed over into CT. Too bad we didn’t have Skyeye for the JFK assassination. That might have shut people up about the grassy knoll. :rolleyes:. Iran-Contra is not a conspiracy theory. It was an \*actual \*conspiracy. > [@](#): > > How about this as a restriction: Skyeye can’t be used as evidence to open a investigation. That’s barely a restriction. The investigation will simply have been opened thanks to a tip by prized informant “Fuzzy Dunlop”, which provided probable cause to look at the Skyeye footage. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/100 "2015-07-01T01:24:46Z")
> [@](#): > > Are you OK with a real life “Eye of Sauron” for mass surveillance? Yes, as long as it is literally a giant flaming eye on top of a mountain. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739/101 "2015-07-01T01:32:33Z")
Isn’t that poetic flourish a bit of well poisoning? After all, Sauron was the dark lord who wished to enslave all of Middle Earth. The government is a benevolent benefactor looking out for its citizens and from time to time a network of private interests, who also share a mutual philanthropic mission. Seems like looking into backyards and windows would be super illegal, but there’s probably some legal gymnastics one can do to make it kosher. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-ok-with-a-real-life-eye-of-sauron-for-mass-surveillance/723739.md?page=6)