Yet the information commissioner's office has found in its research "a general unquestioning assumption [among the public] that CCTV works". The myth of the silver bullet, justifying a massive infringement for dubious payback, has taken hold. Our lack of privacy has become utterly mundane. The average Londoner is caught on camera 300 times a day. Mark you, today someone is eating their sandwiches while they view you going about your honest business.
Being an outsider as such, I am interested in your curiosity about the cctv camera operations of London and for what reasons you've brought this into your work?
Sometime late last year I saw a documentary about the cctv network in London. It also talked about the underground road traffic sensors, and also something similar which monitors movements in the thames. It was impressive, in terms of technology, though it does make you wonder what else they can use it for.
I'm not sure if you are aware of the public transport ticketing system of Oyster? It's basically a plastic card which holds an amount of credit and any travel passes which you swipe for bus and in and out of tube stations. When logging into your online account you can view your journey history and how much is cost. Using Oyster is not only more convenient then buying single tickets each time, but also about half the price of a normal fare. I came across a blog a few days ago where someone had posted a comment about how they refused to use Oyster, stating that it was just a way for the government to track your movements. It had me wondering, what would they possibly use this information for? And am I honestly going to be getting myself involved in something so incriminating that I wont want that evidence to be available? What possible other reasoning could this evidence be used for against an innocent person?
It is interesting the way people think about these things, whether for or against.
Your coloured tube lines are a little too much aesthetically, but I love the idea and obviously there being no other way to bring that message through. Great piece to think about Raphael, and lovely type as always!
posted 07 Dec 2007
mydeadpony There can be no easy answer Carly.
To understand the need for governments (and secret services) to control/check the population through technology would require you to read in depths about how it is and has been going on under other shapes before.
For example you can read "Shock doctrine" by Naomi Klein, "Political ponerology" by A. Lobaczewski and "The paranoia switch" by Martha Stout.
Check out the Sott.net as well and read as much as you like and how you feel like it.
Yet the information commissioner's office has found in its research "a general unquestioning assumption [among the public] that CCTV works". The myth of the silver bullet, justifying a massive infringement for dubious payback, has taken hold. Our lack of privacy has become utterly mundane. The average Londoner is caught on camera 300 times a day. Mark you, today someone is eating their sandwiches while they view you going about your honest business.
