Message from ikillomega in Subverse #newsroom
Oh neither do i. Fortunately the math behind it doesn't lie
That what makes cryptology such an important asset to protect
Could be true, sure. I know only a bit about cryptography in tech.
My skepticism is fueled by a lack of trust.
...as all skepticism is, I suppose.
I'm certainly no expert in the math.. thats for sure.
Lack of trust?
In government and corporations.
Have you considered a career in Cybersecurity?
and what is scotland yard using them for? tracking down mean people on twitter
well its a 2 year old article
Yep.. Thats my point
The tech can so easily be used nefariously
usually they do work with ctv
I'm a 100% Free Market Capitalist, therefore I support the average working guy, the small business owner, the freelance Web designer... NOT Google, Wall Street, or the Beltway. So, when I hear about things like "tracking" and "facial recognition", I fear there may be some truth behind it.
Governments are going to use tech to oppress and control. It's what governments do.
Governments gotta government...
Government's natural direction is to grow state power. Freedom limits growth, therefore freedom must be limited.
basicly looking through vast quantitys of convicted criminal photos and comparing them with cvt footage that corrisponds with reported crimes and then compare other ctv with other reported crimes
like i asked earlier, at what point is catching a murder no longer important?
when the murderer is you?
no, but if they have the tools to catch him, they have to tools to find you
@Grenade123 I suppose, in the eyes of the government, it would depend on who the victim is.
i'm not asking about the government
i'm asking about YOU
They managed to solve crimes before mass surveillance...
mass surveillance just makes it industrial.
at what point is the ability to catch a murder not worth it for your own personal privacy
If it's better for 100 guilty people to go free less 1 innocent go to jail... Surely the same should apply to privacy?
@LOLTRON more cameras, means more chances to catch a murder right as it happens, means less likely for there to be mass murders.
in theory, anyway
I would say catching a murderer is important, but we were catching killers before mass Internet surveillance and if you can show me data PROVING this rate of arrest has been improved for the better, I'll believe it. Still, even then I'd have to weigh it against the validity of sacrificing freedoms of everyone to catch about 1% of criminals, which I generally would not do.
^ the evidence suggests that isnt the case
most murders are crimes of passion, not premeditated.
Mass Murders are statistically 0