Surveillance – the double-edged sword
People are outraged about all the spying going, yet never actually bother thinking their outrage through (as usual).
The perceptive problem is that people endlessly attribute more importance to themselves, thinking spy-stuff is there to spy on THEM – I hate to break it to those who feel that way, but no one actually cares enough about you (or, by correlation, any of us) to spy on you – the spy-stuff is there to capture bad guys doing bad things.
The illustrate by example – I have video surveillance in my house and in drive-way and garage. I don’t spend all day “reviewing” the video surveillance, in the hopes of catching myself or my neighbors in compromising positions. I *do* review the video when a break-in happened, or when something gets vandalized, and then the recording becomes useful.
Could I, or anyone with access to the recording equipment endlessly ogle at the screens and “observe” people. Sure. The data isn’t protected, or encrypted, and the recording devices aren’t particularly secured – but again, it comes down to “no one particularly cares”. No, really, no one cares about you, or me, or anyone else ‘normal’ to want to waste their time looking through our data stream. No one.
This isn’t the 50s or 60s (or TV land), when surveillance actually required humans listening in, in real-time, to their surveillance targets.
When something bad happens, though, you’ll be the first one clamoring “where the hell are the video cameras? Why are there no video cameras???”