Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The New Totalitarianism of Surveillance Technology

Posted 2 years ago on Aug. 22, 2012, 8:23 a.m. EST by john23 (-272)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

A software engineer in my Facebook community wrote recently about his outrage that when he visited Disneyland, and went on a ride, the theme park offered him the photo of himself and his girlfriend to buy – with his credit card information already linked to it. He noted that he had never entered his name or information into anything at the theme park, or indicated that he wanted a photo, or alerted the humans at the ride to who he and his girlfriend were – so, he said, based on his professional experience, the system had to be using facial recognition technology. He had never signed an agreement allowing them to do so, and he declared that this use was illegal. He also claimed that Disney had recently shared data from facial-recognition technology with the United States military.

Yes, I know: it sounds like a paranoid rant.

Except that it turned out to be true. News21, supported by the Carnegie and Knight foundations, reports that Disney sites are indeed controlled by face-recognition technology, that the military is interested in the technology, and that the face-recognition contractor, Identix, has contracts with the US government – for technology that identifies individuals in a crowd.

Fast forward: after the Occupy crackdowns, I noted that odd-looking CCTVs had started to appear, attached to lampposts, in public venues in Manhattan where the small but unbowed remnants of Occupy congregated: there was one in Union Square, right in front of their encampment. I reported here on my experience of witnessing a white van marked "Indiana Energy" that was lifting workers up to the lampposts all around Union Square, and installing a type of camera. When I asked the workers what was happening – and why an Indiana company was dealing with New York City civic infrastructure, which would certainly raise questions – I was told: "I'm a contractor. Talk to ConEd."

continued......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/15/new-totalitarianism-surveillance-technology

10 Comments

10 Comments


Read the Rules

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Dude, that is a great argument.

[-] -2 points by deepthoughtV2 (-8) 2 years ago

Who cares what you insist? What matters is the law and the decisions judges make in Supreme Court. You won't defend yourself in court with an "I insist". Your rant seems devoid of scientific and thorough analysis. It's just about your subjective opinion that you "insist" is right. Next...

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

fees are taxes

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

the court gets money from fees

I would prefer to give to an organization I have some control over like the government

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (4846) 2 years ago

Thank you John23, for this forum post.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by deepthoughtV2 (-8) 2 years ago

What about OWS's Occucopter?

This OWS helicopter uses video cameras to film OWS events from the sky. It can also zoom in and take photos of individuals. Would you like to build your own so you can spy on your friends?

http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/OccuCopter