What is going on with the UK

Amhran Nua

What is going on with the UK lately? We have things like project INDECT being based there (admittedly an EU funded project)

The main expected results of the INDECT project are:

* to realise a trial installation of the monitoring and surveillance system in various points of city agglomeration and demonstration of the prototype of the system with 15 node stations,
* implementation of a distributed computer system that is capable of acquisition, storage and effective sharing on demand of the data as well as intelligent processing,
* construction of a family of prototypes of devices used for mobile object tracking,
* construction of a search engine for fast detection of persons and documents based on watermarking technology and utilising comprehensive research on watermarking technology used for semantic search,
* construction of agents assigned to continuous and automatic monitoring of public resources such as: web sites, discussion forums, UseNet groups, file servers, p2p networks as well as individual computer systems

We have DNA testing at the borders to ascertain point of origin of refugees (which is so scientifically unsound I don't know where to begin)

CAMBRIDGE, UNITED KINGDOM—Scientists are greeting with surprise and dismay a project to use DNA and isotope analysis of tissue from asylum seekers to evaluate their nationality and help decide who can enter the United Kingdom. “Horrifying,” “naïve,” and “flawed” are among the adjectives geneticists and isotope specialists have used to describe the “Human Provenance pilot project,” launched quietly in mid-September by the U.K. Border Agency. Their consensus: The project is not scientifically valid--or even sensible.

“My first reaction is this is wildly premature, even ignoring the moral and ethical aspects,” says Alec Jeffreys of the University of Leicester, who pioneered human DNA fingerprinting.

And this latest, they are setting up a new "game" whereby citizens get to watch the CCTV cameras everywhere and crimes win rewards of up to £1000.

A new internet game is about to be launched which allows 'super snooper' players to plug into the nation's CCTV cameras and report on members of the public committing crimes.

The 'Internet Eyes' service involves players scouring thousands of CCTV cameras installed in shops, businesses and town centres across Britain looking for law-breakers.

Players who help catch the most criminals each month will win cash prizes up to £1,000.

I have no idea what sort of political climate allows these kinds of extreme policies to be implemented, or why the people in the UK are not up in arms over it. 1984 was a novel lads, not an instruction manual. The last one in particular smacks of the old cold war secret police tactics, get neighbours spying on each other - I thought it was April 1st, reading that. Another baffler is why they might need all this stuff.

humanji

Well, the last one is just a novel idea by a security company, isn't it? Instead of having to monitor security cameras, they have random idiots with nothing to do with their time, do it for free. It's kind of ingenius actually. It won't have access to all cameras in the world, only the ones who sign up to the company. Hardly as scary as you're makign it out to be.

ei.sdraob

humanji wrote: »

Well, the last one is just a novel idea by a security company, isn't it? Instead of having to monitor security cameras, they have random idiots with nothing to do with their time, do it for free. It's kind of ingenius actually. It won't have access to all cameras in the world, only the ones who sign up to the company. Hardly as scary as you're makign it out to be.

Hmm, sounds like a great job for the unemployed

Amhran Nua

humanji wrote: »

Well, the last one is just a novel idea by a security company, isn't it? Instead of having to monitor security cameras, they have random idiots with nothing to do with their time, do it for free. It's kind of ingenius actually. It won't have access to all cameras in the world, only the ones who sign up to the company. Hardly as scary as you're makign it out to be.

Its not government mandated, thats true, but the idea of paying citizens to spy on one another (via a private company) is still terrifying. The question to be asked is why isn't the UK government putting a stop to it, I can see plenty of scope for abuse among the BNP crowd for example. Community-based "policing" is usually a bad idea. Neighborhood watch groups, community church groups, "not-in-my-neighborhood"-ers, will all get together and find somebody to harass.

And that still leaves the question of DNA testing at the border and automated web agents filtering forums for "abnormal behaviour", which are government financed.

The direction being taken by our nearest neighbour and one of our most important trading partners should be of great interest to us here. Last month it was revealed that Britain has 4.2 million CCTV cameras - the equivalent of one per 14 people - one and a half times as many as China.

humanji

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Its not government mandated, thats true, but the idea of paying citizens to spy on one another (via a private company) is still terrifying. The question to be asked is why isn't the UK government putting a stop to it, I can see plenty of scope for abuse among the BNP crowd for example. Community-based "policing" is usually a bad idea. Neighborhood watch groups, community church groups, "not-in-my-neighborhood"-ers, will all get together and find somebody to harass.

I can see the headline now: "Oppressive Police State Clamps Down On Company For Daring To Try Something New!!!". They're damned if they do something and damned if they don't. What reason should the government give for shutting down this business? And do you think many companies around the world are going to sign up to have their business monitored in a half-asses way? The company will fold within the year, I say.

As I said before, it's not every camera in the world that's going to be part of it. I say it's mainly going to be cameras in alleyways or industrial estates.

And that still leaves the question of DNA testing at the border and automated web agents filtering forums for "abnormal behaviour", which are government financed.

And will be shut down as soon as they realise they've wasted their money on something that doesn't work right. It's the same with our voting machines. They seemed a good idea at the time.

The direction being taken by our nearest neighbour and one of our most important trading partners should be of great interest to us here. Last month it was revealed that Britain has 4.2 million CCTV cameras - the equivalent of one per 14 people - one and a half times as many as China.

How many of those are for private use by companies? I bet the number wouldn't be as scary if you factor out those.

Amhran Nua

humanji wrote: »

I can see the headline now: "Oppressive Police State Clamps Down On Company For Daring To Try Something New!!!".

Or more likely: "Enlightened State Clamps Down On Company For Daring To Set up Private Gestapo!!!".

humanji wrote: »

What reason should the government give for shutting down this business?

Violations of the FoI act over there I should think, unless this company wishes to record every video frame that runs through their system, as UK citizens are entitled to request copies of images of themselves captured on publicly available broadcasts.

humanji wrote: »

The company will fold within the year, I say.

I would certainly hope so.

humanji wrote: »

And will be shut down as soon as they realise they've wasted their money on something that doesn't work right. It's the same with our voting machines. They seemed a good idea at the time.

There is no way that this could be considered a good idea from a practical or moral standpoint. Like the INDECT project, there is no reasonable excuse for these measures - I mean are criminals and terrorists going to be talking about their crimes on public message boards? All it does is create a sense of being watched among the public.

humanji wrote: »

How many of those are for private use by companies? I bet the number wouldn't be as scary if you factor out those.

Chinese companies use security cameras too.

Amhran Nua

And heres more:

THOUSANDS of the worst families in England are to be put in “sin bins” in a bid to change their bad behaviour, Ed Balls announced yesterday.

The Children’s Secretary set out £400million plans to put 20,000 problem families under 24-hour CCTV super-vision in their own homes.

They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction.

Around 2,000 families have gone through these Family Intervention Projects so far.

But ministers want to target 20,000 more in the next two years, with each costing between £5,000 and £20,000 – a potential total bill of £400million.

Ministers hope the move will reduce the number of youngsters who get drawn into crime because of their chaotic family lives, as portrayed in Channel 4 comedy drama Shameless.

Sin bin projects operate in half of council areas already but Mr Balls wants every local authority to fund them.

He said: “This is pretty tough and non-negotiable support for families to get to the root of the problem. There should be Family Intervention Projects in every local authority area because every area has families that need support.”

I mean everyone appreciates the problems with certain areas even in Ireland, but the solution isn't to put cameras in homes and send around toughs to make sure the corn flakes haven't expired, its to deal with the underlying social issues.

humanji

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Or more likely: "Enlightened State Clamps Down On Company For Daring To Set up Private Gestapo!!!".

What is enlightened about cutting down on peoples freedom? If they aren't breaking the law, then how is the government clamping down on them a good thing? If someone had moral objections to what you do for a living, would you be happy that the government shut you down for no reason other than someone on the internet wanted it?

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Violations of the FoI act over there I should think, unless this company wishes to record every video frame that runs through their system, as UK citizens are entitled to request copies of images of themselves captured on publicly available broadcasts.

Maybe they do. Have you rang them up and asked?

Amhran Nua wrote: »

There is no way that this could be considered a good idea from a practical or moral standpoint. Like the INDECT project, there is no reasonable excuse for these measures - I mean are criminals and terrorists going to be talking about their crimes on public message boards? All it does is create a sense of being watched among the public.

The problem is that the English government has no one pointing out that maybe they should think about things before jumping on the latest bandwagon. Instead they go full steam ahead with the first project that comes along and then end up scrapping it when it doesn't work out.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Chinese companies use security cameras too.

So? You completely missed my point. Anyway, we've a conspiracies forum for all this stuff.

Amhran Nua

humanji wrote: »

What is enlightened about cutting down on peoples freedom?

So you would see increasing surveillance, in one case unregulated private surveillance of the public, as increasing freedom?

humanji wrote: »

Maybe they do. Have you rang them up and asked?

Given the phenomenal costs involved with tracking and storing millions of hours of video footage from diverse sources, unlikely isn't the word.

humanji wrote: »

The problem is that the English government has no one pointing out that maybe they should think about things before jumping on the latest bandwagon. Instead they go full steam ahead with the first project that comes along and then end up scrapping it when it doesn't work out.

Looks like there are plenty of people pointing out its a bad idea, including pioneering experts in the field.

humanji wrote: »

So? You completely missed my point. Anyway, we've a conspiracies forum for all this stuff.

Not unless you have reason to think that Chinese companies use less cameras than UK companies. Also I don't see what conspiracy theory there might be. The facts are right there, no its not some mysterious cabal but it is a disturbing trend I wouldn't like to see repeated here.

PrestonDaly

How anybody defends any of the issues raised is beyond me.

WELCOME TO HELL

humanji

Amhran Nua wrote: »

So you would see increasing surveillance, in one case unregulated private surveillance of the public, as increasing freedom?

I see one company seeing an opportunity to make money and you wanting them shut down without researching what they are actually doing.

Given the phenomenal costs involved with tracking and storing millions of hours of video footage from diverse sources, unlikely isn't the word.

But you dont' know for sure.

Looks like there are plenty of people pointing out its a bad idea, including pioneering experts in the field.

But nobody in their own party.

Not unless you have reason to think that Chinese companies use less cameras than UK companies.

What? You point out the amount of CCTV cameras and think it's a terrible problem. I'm pointing out that a CCTV camera pointing at the till of a newsagents isn't part of a government conspiracy to film everything we do. It's an independant persons camera. The stat for the amount of CCTV cameras is pointless because it doesn't take into accoutn what they are for, who owns them or what they pointed at. It's just a meaningkless number.

Also I don't see what conspiracy theory there might be. The facts are right there, no its not some mysterious cabal but it is a disturbing trend I wouldn't like to see repeated here.

It's your interpretation of the facts that makes the conspiracy.

ghost_ie

If this were to come in over here I can see only one solution. Wear a burqah when leaving home so no-one can ever identify you

evercloserunion

The only one I would consider particularly questionable is the second one.

Lame Lantern

This is what happens when your leaders delegate the burden of leadership to tabloid newspapers. Everyone's afraid of everything.

dvpower

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Hmm, sounds like a great job for the unemployed

... or boards posters.

ghost_ie

The UK has become more and more of a Big Brother state over the last few years.

ednwireland

ghost_ie wrote: »

The UK has become more and more of a Big Brother state over the last few years.

yep couldnt imagine going back to live there now, speed cameras everywhere (didnt they announce that they would track every car on the roads)
cctv on every corner, dont know how it turned into a police state on labours watch as well