This gets us to the central problem of today’s surveillance state. No one running the cameras wants to be observed. One reason that city officials object to releasing Flock data, for example, must that they themselves are among the recorded. The cameras are on them too; they too can be tracked. Everything means everything for these everywhere cameras.

  • ulterno@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    That’s how it is done.
    If it is a public camera, it has to be a public record.
    And if not, then anyone having access to the feed, has to have their whole life (both work and personal) be available as a public record.

    If not, then you now have cases where most people can’t afford to defend themselves from malicious cop allegations.
    To prevent this, anyone arrested, pre-trial has to have access to all searches done by cops, related to the allegation and ability to pull-up 100% of their own footage anytime near the event in question.

    If any part of the footage is deleted, due to “technical issues” like, “the footage was deleted” or “some of the cameras were not working”, then the arrest is illegal and the police department is responsible for compensation.