Irony is dead.
The UK killed it: there are 28 CCTV cameras within 200 yards of George Orwell’s house.
I was watching a British SciFi show called "Torchwood" (don’t bother, it’s truly awful) and noted that they used CCTVs in the episodes to trace peoples’ movements. I thought to myself, "That’s goofy. There’s no way any place has that many cameras." I should have known politics would force me once again into realizing that sometimes I am not pessimistic enough.
Tip o’ the tin foil hat to Boing Boing.
April 1st, 2007 at 9:12 pm
What’s next? Randists forming a collective? Kiplingers for isolationism? Saganists for astrology? Tsk tsk, what is this world coming to?
April 1st, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Aw, I like Torchwood. That’s rather in spite of its awfulness, for the most part, although a couple of the ending episodes are genuinely good.
Except when Owen starts dropping compound f-bombs, at which point it just gets ridiculous. Further proof that just because you can doesn’t mean you should. (Same story for the sex alien from episode two. Good grief.)
April 1st, 2007 at 9:23 pm
[…] (Via The Bad Astronomer) […]
April 1st, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Quick, someone tell Alanis Morissette that she needs to revise her lyrics.
April 1st, 2007 at 9:54 pm
The Spaniards got the Brits beat by several years:
http://anti-izquierdismo.blogspot.com/2005/10/george-orwell-el-profeta.html
Although the page is dated 2005, apparently such cameras have been in place in Barcelona since the time that city got cleaned up for the 1992 Summer Olympics.
April 1st, 2007 at 10:32 pm
Is that thesame “Torchewood’ usedin the last season of ‘Dr Who?’
Ironycan’t be dead - we still notice it ..
April 1st, 2007 at 10:34 pm
April 1st - April fools! Its April 2nd already!
At least it is in Australia…
Sorry about the typos in my first post above.
April 1st, 2007 at 10:40 pm
In fact, pretty much every place in the UK has that many cameras these days (especially London) - up to and including every major road in the country. Of course, I bet that map doesn’t show all the privately-owned CCTV cameras…
It’s even better when the government advertises the fact like this.
April 1st, 2007 at 10:51 pm
A year or so ago a friend of a friend in the UK got in a fight outside a bar, lost, then went to find the guy. He eventually found him and they fought again, but this time the cops arrested both of them. They tried to pretend like they were just friends fooling around but when they got to the station he was shown CCTV of himself walking all around town looking for the guy.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:26 am
Which is why the police love all the cameras, they sometimes make their job a lot easier. The problem is that we don’t know how secure the system is (could criminals or terrorists hack it?) or what else the government is using the information for (tracking political activists?). I think I read recently that the UK has one CCTV camera for every 14 people.
April 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 am
Those who treat freedom for security…
Unfortunately it seems like the so called western democratic counties are developing in a direction were they more and more interfere into their citizens private lives.
Every single action for itself seems to be reasonable, protecting the innocent and not harming anybody.
What worries me is that there is for sure no conspiracy behind this. Its just a self driven development in small steps. Each steps seems to be resonable because its only a small step further then the step before was. In Europe we are used to a lot of control by our governments. But I am afraid in the U.S. this has also started despite the fact the U.S. has always been an island of individual freedom.
What can we do?
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:16 am
Is this irony or too much pessimism? Aren’t we safer when cameras are watching us everywhere? … Ok, I was sarcastic here… Who will be watching the watchers is the question.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:19 am
Well, we don’t have trivial little obstacles like a written constitution getting in the way of having our rights eroded. But don’t think you’re immune just because you have got one. This invasion of privacy is fuelled by the “terrorist threat” - all these violations of our human rights are being done in the name of countering terrorism, and nobody stops to ask “hang on, do I really feel that much at threat?” It’s the politician’s dream - control of the populace by heightened fear…
Be afraid, be very afraid. We all have more to fear from our governments’ misguided attempts to combat “terror” than we do from the terrorists themselves.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:29 am
Ooops, it has to be trade not treat of course. Sorry for that
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:20 am
What do we do? These guys knew.
“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Not that I’m spoiling for a fight but well… there you have it.
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:53 am
@gerrsun: I’m not so good in American history. But as far as I know Thomas Jefferson (who was among those guys) always had been afraid of the situation giving too much power to the president. As far as I know in the last 30 to 40 years there have been a lot changes in what the president can do without asking congress.
Would Jefferson think time has come “to throw off such Government” if he would live today?
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:58 am
Torchwood is an anagram of Doctor Who.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:07 am
I can’t speak for Jefferson. But if I did, his heirs would probably try to have me arrested for digging him up and using his skull as a gruesome hand puppet. So I won’t.
Here were the original founding fathers criteria for revolution:
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
Too long to post here so just post the link.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:21 am
Cameras everywhere don’t seem to be of use in PREVENTING terror but are much better suited towards the control of a population.
They had cameras on the trains and stations in Spain and they made for chilling news footage but they didn’t stop the bombing.
So for England I say get out your Guy Fawkes masks!
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:32 am
No Way?
Well WAY Dude!, one day while waiting for the wife (outside a clothes store of course) at Oxford Circus, I counted 26 cameras visible from just that one spot!
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:45 am
Irony: Dead? Transparency: In Embryo?…
Via Bad Astronomy, we hear that “there are 28 CCTV cameras within 200 yards of George Orwell’s house.” This bit of information is brought to you by ThisIsLondon.co.uk, whose rather panicky article concludes in the following manner:
This …
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:51 am
You can “be afraid, be very afraid” Mr. Douglas, and make sure you put your tin hat on too. As for gerrsun, just what we need is a clog wearer’s revolution. What a bunch of whiners. Name me ONE thing that the government has done to you personally that leads you to believe 1984 is here, just one…waiting….waiting….
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:01 am
I’m a card carrying libertarian and I have no problem with the cameras. As long as the stay in public areas and pointed at public areas. If they start pointing them into residential windows or using IR cameras aimed at houses, THEN we have something to talk about.
If the government is tasked with keeping PUBLIC order, then I don’t mind them using tools like this to make their job easier.
In the US any cities have cameras on highways and interstates with datacenters watching 24/7. Response time to accidents is quite amazing which is certainly useful during rush hour traffic.
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:58 am
Tim: They made it illegal for me to decide what I can put in my own body. Twice.
Once was called Prohibition and required a constitutional amendmant. The other was just to control those pesky black folks who had the temerity to step on a white mans shadow or look at a white mans woman, all because of that crazy Ganja weed they smoked.
So you think our government is benign?
Fool! It’s run by men, steeped in the evolutionary mandate to control everything,,,
So soon you forget Machiavelli,,,
Gary 7
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 am
Addendum: Who was it who said,
” Freedom dies, not with a bang, but a whimper,,,”?
Gary 7
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:28 am
Quick now, how many of those who are making these cliche similes here have actually read “1984″? How many other pieces of state apparatus are necessary for the oppression described in that story?
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:43 am
Amstrad, what about cameras pointed at public areas which happen to cover, but also include a window into a private home?
I despise the cameras. Keep an eye on the law abiders!! Gotta watch out for them.
And I rather like Torchwood, despite its fallacies. With the exception of a couple of episodes, I thought it was pretty groovy.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:53 am
Less cameras or more? How about personal cameras that record holographically a 1 meter radius around us. The video feed would stream straight to a secure storage facility that is only accessed when there is a legal reason to do so. (concept from the book “Hominids” by Robert J Sawyer).
Or how about a similar concept but also including a ‘truth machine’, a perfect lie detector, that everyone has to use when conducting government or business transactions or traveling out of country. (from “Truth Machine” by James Halperin).
Let’s face it that the more people on the planet that have no social conscience, the more necessary it is to root them out and the more extreme the tools to do so.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:07 am
Torchwood is OK.. well, you know, it’s a matter of opinion. I like it, most of it. There are some episodes that are very good indeed and some that are.. well… anyway, it’s worth a look.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:40 am
For another astronomer-turned-writer’s outlook, try The Transparent Society, by David Brin.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:41 am
Hold on a minute, read the rest of the story:
“Orwell’s view of the tree-filled gardens outside the flat is under 24-hour surveillance from two cameras perched on traffic lights.”
These are for monitoring traffic flows
“The flat’s rear windows are constantly viewed from two more security cameras outside a conference centre in Canonbury Place.”
This is security for the conference centre
“In a lane, just off the square, close to Orwell’s favourite pub, the Compton Arms, a camera at the rear of a car dealership records every person entering or leaving the pub.”
This is security for the Car showroom
How in the world is this Big Brother? These are traffic control cameras and privately owned cameras used for security monitoring of premises. They’re not part of some government scheme to keep tabs on people, and the 28 cameras around Orwell’s flat aren’t all part of the same network.
It’s rather like going down the street and assuming that anyone in a red shirt is part of the same gang and they’re all watching you.
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:50 am
Well, is this the end of “freedom”? Does the “need of security” (haha) really go SO far?
“Big Brother IS watching you!”
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:03 am
City center security cameras are popular with the public in the UK because they have made the streets they cover noticeably safer. Of course, some of the criminals simply go elsewhere, which adds to the pressure to install more cameras for wider coverage.
In general, British people are no where near as suspicious of government as are Americans. I noticed the difference as soon as I moved to the States. Concerns over a vague threat of the possibility of a slow descent into some kind of Orwellian society is no match for the real and immediate benefits the security cameras bring.
We’ve had all the debates. One was even over photographs taken by speed trap cameras being mailed to your home that could show you weren’t where you told your wife or husband you would be. British DNA laws allow for the police to cast much wider nets than in the US as they track down criminals. (See yesterday’s 60 Minutes).
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:05 am
In a staggering meta-irony, that website is part of the group which publishes the Daily Mail, whose “immigrant ASBO yobs will sell your babies to terrorists” stories arguably got us into this mess in the first place.
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:25 am
An interesting topic, but people say the data on the CCTV cameras will not be used unless you do something wrong.
Much like this website asks for a personal email address before publishing a comment and so takes private information, when you don’t need to, for security reasons.
Much the same is it not?
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:29 am
Caption on the paranoids tombstone:
“I told you someone was out to get me,,,”
General rule of thumb,,,NEVER, EVER trust your government. ALWAYS know that it is run by humans, with their own agendas and rationale. Sometimes, those agendas aligne with your own. Unfortunately, people will do what they perceive is in THEIR interests. That may or may not be in yours.
The entire rationale for a Bill of Rights was to prevent the dictatorship of the majority. Just because most people believe something is right, doesn’t mean that it is right.When George Bush was pushing for the invasion of Iraq, 90% of the US populace agreed with him(I and my brother were among the recalcitrant 10%).
I don’t like emperor george. Everything I’ve seen of his actions betokens a small minded, petty tyrant. His is the mindset of an elitist minority, those who believe they have a devine right to rule. How inconvinient for him that he has been born into a representative republic,,,
Cameras on the streets provide no increase in security. It just makes it possible to capture rule breakers but always after the fact. What does increase our personal security is when people care enough about strangers that they will involve themselves in an observed conflict, even though that may be dangerous to them. It’s far easier to remain uninvolved, hoping the conflict will pass us by.Thus rape occurs on a public street, while strangers pass.
While in Saudi Arabia, I saw two young Saudiis engage in an argument. When the conflict progressed to a physical level, people all around intervened, separating the combatants. In that environment, there was no waiting for police intervention. It was a responsibility for the community to be involved.
That same sense of caring and personal responsiblity was prevelant at the Dead concerts I attended. There is far more security in such an environment than all the cameras or governments in the world can provide.
GAry 7
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:33 am
Gary says
“While in Saudi Arabia, I saw two young Saudiis engage in an argument. When the conflict progressed to a physical level, people all around intervened, separating the combatants. In that environment, there was no waiting for police intervention. It was a responsibility for the community to be involved.
That same sense of caring and personal responsiblity was prevelant at the Dead concerts I attended. There is far more security in such an environment than all the cameras or governments in the world can provide.”
I think you’ll find at 4 o’clock in the morning, there isn’t a whole lot of people around.
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 am
Wow, that’s the first time I’ve seen someone use three commas as an ellipsis.
April 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 am
[b]An interesting topic, but people say the data on the CCTV cameras will not be used unless you do something wrong.
Much like this website asks for a personal email address before publishing a comment and so takes private information, when you don’t need to, for security reasons.[/b]
The difference being that it’s your choice whether to register on this web site. However, no one is asking your permission to record your image on the security cameras.
I wonder how this would work in a society that had a large proportion of people whose belief system included the idea that a photograph steals the soul of the person photographed.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:04 am
I’m gonna be contrarian and say I support our new CCTV based overlords.
Oh, wait, forgot what site was on.
Bottom line: they’ll never hire enough people to competently watch all the cameras, and any auto-ID software will utterly suck gas. Move along. Nothing to be seen here beyond the hysteria.
Here’s a better issue, and along the lines of information suppression you watchdog, Phil.
Many schools in the UK are dropping controversial subjects (the Holocaust, the Crusades, etc.) because it might offend Muslim students.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=445979&in_page_id=1770
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:09 am
This does creep me out a bit, but I think Amstrad (upthread) made a very good point: As long as these are only pointed at public areas and are never allowed to invade private citizens’ homes, then its ok and probably beneficial. It would also be good if the government-run camera network feeds were accessible by private citizens freely and at any time. If the data is equally shared between the government and the citizens then there is less risk of harm. Public, free networks are the way to go.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:10 am
That story would carry far more weight if it didn’t come from the Daily Mail, Desperation.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:23 am
Alex:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/6517359.stm
There. Happy?
Any more ad hominem fallacies and you’ll be required to turn in your skeptics license, decoder ring and Agatha Heterodyne action figure.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:32 am
It’s not just the cameras, it’s what gets done with them.
A lot of councils have installed cameras everywhere, with public support, on the promise of using them for crime prevention.
But once the cameras are in, they just get used to fine people en masse for utterly trivial parking offences, such as stopping momentraily to let someone out.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:41 am
Looking for a reliable news source isn’t about ad hominem denial. The Daily Mail article focused only on the subjects of Holocaust denial and the Crusades. It did not cast as wide a net to include the slave trade. You want the better news source. Or more of them.
However, and I say this as an American who has taken a recent interest in British education (I have waaay too much time on my hands), British teachers have been getting really whiny lately. The complain about the students a lot these days. For God’s sake, you’re the adult! Just teach the damn curriculum! Suddenly it’s the students’ fault that teachers don’t want to play on the opposite end of the table. My mother has been a teacher for decades, she wouldn’t give a flying rat’s rear-end about the students trying to disagree.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:47 am
You’ll have to pry that action figure from my cold, dead hands, Desperation. Yes, it’s an interesting story once you get away from the Daily Mail spin.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:48 am
Who me, preach revolution? I merely posted it to point towards what our founding fathers felt was a solution to govenment abuses. Whether we are there or not is another matter… I don’t think we are but there are others who might.
Do I personally feel the government has made direct moves against me and my freedoms? Some, but rather I feel the chains and bars have already been forged and set in place, slowly, piece by piece, so as to not draw attention.
As for an Orwellian instance, Last year I was given a traffic citation for running a red light. Given by an officer? No, a traffic camera which placed me in the intersection at .2 seconds. Note the decimal. Horrible I know but still impersonal and uncaring. The options are pay it, or fight the bureacracy for the 70 dollars.
On a more indirect measure, the government of my state has failed to implement credit freezing measures which would make it much more difficult for my identity to be stolen. This apparently at the behest of the credit card companies who want easy access to consumers for more and more credit. Having to carry around a piece of paper the rest of your life which says “That wasn’t me” doesn’t sound like freedom, it sounds like “Les Miserable”.
Forcing me to participate in the social security system when I would be better served investing my money myself.
Not implementing a more fairer tax plan than is currently in place because it would place more power in the hands of consumers than in the hands of the politicians.
Requirement of all drugs and procedures to be approved by the FDA before being made available to the public, as if I could not find out about them on my own and weigh the risks myself.
and let’s not forget that whole war of northern aggression.
April 2nd, 2007 at 9:58 am
IIRC the use of CCTV in the UK is covered by the Data Protection act and operators have been prosecuted for inappropriate use. See here
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:01 am
“as if I could not find out about them on my own and weigh the risks myself.”
Don’t get me wrong I agree with you. I just have one word: Homeopathy.
“and let’s not forget that whole war of northern aggression.”
The South shall riiiiiise again!
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:03 am
I want to come back to what I said some hours ago. The polica of the small steps.
Example:
I am 42 years old now. When I was about 7 oe 8 my Dad brought home his salery 2 times a month in cash.
Then, it became normal everyone had an account with a bank, so from there on the money was transferred to the account. Very convenient no problem. At that time every German employee still had the right to get pais cash if he wanted to be. In the early Ninetys there were several trials at courts regarding the question if someone can be made to have an account. The result was” Everyone must have an account to do regular bank transfers as for rent, salery and so on” This means for example if I rent an appartment I have to accept I can pay onyl by bank transfer. Same for the salery. Today it is impossible to get paid cash in Germany. Everyone knows bank transfers can be tracked. Ofcourse this is only done if a”crime is suspected” and a judge has to agree. End of the Nineties it became law that taking cash from your account will be automatically registered and given to the German IRS (not sure if IRS is correct, the guys who get the taxes). LAst year in April it became law that if you get unemployed and apply for money from the insurance (every German employee has to pay for by law and which is government controlled) the government can routinely track for your account and all the transfers done in the last 5 years if they are suspicous for some reason. (Without askinbg a judge, being suspicous is enough.
That is the status now. I wonder what it will be in ten years from now.
What makes me afraid is, I do not think there was a plan to have this possibilities when more then 30 years ago. It simply developed that way.
Ofcourse having cameras everywhere in public places is not 1984 (which I read). I only say “be careful”
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:04 am
@ Sticks:
Only four months! That’s outrageous! It’s not just voyeurism, we’re talking about a betrayal of public trust and office.
April 2nd, 2007 at 10:40 am
@Ibrahim
Unfortunately due to the Human Rights act, burning at the stake was banned.
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:08 am
“Of course, I bet that map doesn’t show all the privately-owned CCTV cameras…”
Actually, that’s pretty much all it shows…
http://www.metafilter.com/59932/Big-Brother-is-Watching-You-On-CCTV#1639777
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:22 am
I’m with Gary here. Perhaps cameras all over the place would be a “good thing” (whatever that means) if the governments using them were responsible, mature, and rational, committed to protection and serving the public. But any government that continues to support the foolish “War on Drugs” and similar costly screw ups is a government not worthy of wielding these tools.
April 2nd, 2007 at 11:29 am
@quite desperation:I just read the passage about “controversal historical subjects”.
How can the Holocaust be controversal? It happened and there are NO “different points of view to look at it”.
If it can be thaught in German schools (I mean, it is not very easy to face these facts and to think youre own Granpa was maybe involved) than it should be no problem in any other country of the world!!
Don’t these teachers have the guts to STAND UP AND TEACH THE FACTS!!!!!
But this reminds me of something:
Tim
Says:
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:51 am
You can “be afraid, be very afraid†Mr. Douglas, and make sure you put your tin hat on too. As for gerrsun, just what we need is a clog wearer’s revolution. What a bunch of whiners. Name me ONE thing that the government has done to you personally that leads you to believe 1984 is here, just one…waiting….waiting….
Please note that between 1933 and 1945 for about 80% of the German citizens it was true that the government never did even ONE thing to them personally. You know what happened to the rest.
I DO NOT COMPARE German Nazi government with any of todays governments in Britain, U.S. or elsewhere. But just because it does not harm YOU doesn’t mean it won’t harm someone else.
April 2nd, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Cameras on the streets provide no increase in security. It just makes it possible to capture rule breakers but always after the fact.
Not true. Here’s the summary of a report done by the Scottish Office about CCTV installations in Airdie town center:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/resfinds/crf08-00.htm
CCTV surveillance does work, and that’s why the British public has, by and large, accepted it. Yes, I am sure that abuses do happen, but if you have the right safeguards in place, the benefits will continue to outweigh the risks. Brits are simply not as paranoid about government power as Americans have been, even before Bush started giving US citizens many more reasons to be concerned. Whether it’s due to our differing historical experiences or simply because the Brits have more confidence in their democratic institutions, the Big Brother meme just doesn’t have the same power to scare and worry.
Ironically, as others have pointed out, Americans have lost much more privacy to Big Business than they even have from the Government. I think people would be shocked to find out of just how much private information of theirs is swilling around the datasphere, being traded from one company to another with no permission and little control–much of which is at serious risk of being stolen and used against them. (TJ Maxx, just the other day, announced millions of customers have had their card numbers stolen).
The reality is that it’s only going to get more intrusive. In a couple of decades, unless you want to dig yourself a hole somewhere in Montana, we will all be continually tracked and monitored in everything we do in our daily lives. But little of it will be in the name of security or law enforcement, it will all done in pursuit of the almighty dollar–specifically yours!
April 2nd, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Hey, I LIKE Torchwood! Okay, Owen was a lot to deal with, and the alien sex story was better off in the bitbucket, but they also pulled off some really good things. No series is perfect, but Torchwood is better than most.
And yes, it’s the Torchwood mentioned in Doctor Who, with Captain Jack Harkness from the previous series.
April 2nd, 2007 at 6:04 pm
Well, they can put a cam outside my house if they want to. And go ahead and point it at my window. I’ll just drop my drawers at the thing and blind the whole lot of em, not to mention the lifelong nightmares they will be subject to. LOL!
April 3rd, 2007 at 1:08 am
To Tim above: I didn’t say that the Government had done anything 1984-ish - in fact, I didn’t even mention 1984. What I meant was that they are gradually eroding the barriers that exist to prevent future governments imposing more authoritarian rule, and they’re doing this in the name of prevention of something that is less of a real threat to the public than crossing the road. The simple fact is that the current UK government is led by a control freak. A well-meaning control freak, but someone who thinks that governing means regulating people’s lives a finer and finer level.
April 3rd, 2007 at 5:00 am
For an interesting view on the way things are going, see this report http://www.raeng.org.uk/policy/reports/pdf/dilemmas_of_privacy_and_surveillance_report.pdf from the Royal Academy of Engineering
April 3rd, 2007 at 7:34 am
Actually, Alanis wasn’t real ironic in her lyrics to start with…
And as for the cameras, I am as usual crippled by seeing all sides to the situation and feel my own opinion isn’t of any interest to anyone. But this does make me want to read 1984 again. It’s been too long since I’ve felt insanely sorry for Winston.
April 3rd, 2007 at 7:51 am
If you want more irony check this sign from George Orwell’s Square in Barcelona
http://www.carteleonline.com/images_nuevas/1350.jpg
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:27 am
Thomas said, at 07:41am on the 2nd, in essence, that there are “innocent” reasons for the multitude of cameras overlooking the populace, and that some are for our welfare, ie, a good thing.
While I agree that that may be so, that private organisations wishing to safeguard their premises, have installed the cameras and recording apparatus, I have the impression that if some subsequent police investigation requires that location’s images, it only takes a signature from a Judge to subpoena it. Same with traffic cameras and Airports and Supermarkets etc.
And a law-abiding citizen should have no quarms about it. We have all seen the storylines in TV shows where a “loop” is introduced to fool the base control room operator, these things would be nearly impossible generally, and with the multitude of cameras at some spots, absolutely so, as no one could manipulate all of the images.
These days, an alibi would have to true as the evidence would be easy to confirm one way or the other.
I suppose one of the best known video pieces would have been the shot outside the hotel door showing Princess Diana’s driver exiting to drive her away from a function in Paris, unfortunately to die in the tunnel accident, minutes later. That was released to the world, but I wonder what other sources were available, but so far, have been held. Or maybe not at all.
There will always be conspiracies I suppose.
Ivan.
April 3rd, 2007 at 4:50 pm
[…] Bad Astronomy Blog » Irony: 1984 - 2007 […]
April 4th, 2007 at 5:19 am
Tacitus - two things you may be unaware of:
1. It’s the Scottish Executive now, not the Scottish Office.
2. It has recently emerged that the reduction in crime stats reported by the Scottish police was largely down to the reclassification of a whole host of offences (including the ones you specifically mention) as “suspicious occurences” rather than “crimes”. See http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=672072002
As someone who lives in a Scottish city (Edinburgh) I have not personally seen any evidence for the efficacy of CCTV in crime reduction. It certainly hasn’t stopped me…
Whether it’s due to our differing historical experiences or simply because the Brits have more confidence in their democratic institutions, the Big Brother meme just doesn’t have the same power to scare and worry.
Again, I have to say that this does not correspond with my personal experience.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Responding to The German, the reason the Holocaust is controversial is that unlike other historical events, it’s criminal in many “free countries” to ask questions about it. You can openly doubt that Stalin killed anybody; you can deny the Resurrection; you can deny the whole Armenian/Turkish tragedy. But the Holocaust has become something no longer open to any doubt or debate, in any sense. Obviously, anyone who thought that Nazi Germany loved the Jewish people and treated them equally and fairly is deluded or hideously ignorant. But should they be put in jail, or should someone be jailed for saying the number killed was not 6,000,000 but 5,100,00? Many people say, “Yes, there can be no freedom of speech about that.” Most Americans and Brits say no, there can be no legislating the truth; let it defend itself.
April 7th, 2007 at 4:12 am
@Bougainville: ok. Maybe it was a misunderstanding in translation or use of the word controversial. In Germany the word “kontrovers” is usually used with things that are not yet clear and under discussion and a final result has to be obtained sometime in the future.
As I live in a country were “denial of the holocaust” is a crime, I agree with you that as I understand “freedom of speech” this should not be the case.
But on the other hand if you see pictures of British Hooligans (for sure not represantative for the average Brit) doing the “Heil Hitler” salute at the Nuremberg NSDAP area then I agree with our law. In Germany you can be arrested for using this salute.
April 8th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
You should always live your life as if you are being watched … because you probably are.
Originally people lived this way believing that God was the one watching … Now it’s man that is watching. What I fear most is that Man is a much harsher judge then God is.
April 9th, 2007 at 4:51 am
Phil, you’ve finally lost it. Torchwood is BRILLIANT! I mean, Toshiko in bed with another woman? How can you not dig that?!
April 9th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Unless I’m misreading the story, it’s 32 cameras - 28 plus the four that are directed right at where Orwell used to live. Charming.
April 11th, 2007 at 2:59 am
[…] 1984 ALL OVER AGAIN: There are 28 CCTV cameras within 200 yards of George Orwell’s […]
April 26th, 2007 at 6:44 am
I enjoy Torchwood as well, it may be my weird likeing of Captain Jack that keeps me watching tho. I’d just assumed that the completeness of the CCTV was in fiction really. It’s a bit scarey to think maybe its for real. And to think I’m going to study abroad there.
May 8th, 2007 at 7:56 am
NOYB Says: [April 2nd, 2007 at 2:58 am]
Torchwood is an anagram of Doctor Who.
Wow - you’re right - I hadn’t spotted that before! (Slaps forehead.)
In my defence I haven’t seen it so can’t sday muchabout it. I Haven’t even seen that final (double) epsiode of Dr Who & Rose yet which Ivideoed ages ago .. really will getaround toit one day!
As for security cameras everwhere - all these cameras seem a very sad indictment of how little trust we have in our society when it comes to people behaving honourably and truthfully.
I’d agree with theperson whomentioend Saudi Arabia as a better community -Saudi Arabia for Beelzebubs sake people!
Camera camera on the wall
Here we go record it all
All that passes
All that’s done
Scrutinised as death is sum.
Death of people,
social good
Death recorded viewed
not understood.
Seen later
Help its not
Image fuzzy,
Cop in blue
Seems they are the problem true!
FIlm deleted tampered mixed
Used to frame, befuddle, fix
Everstaring electric eye
Oh foolish minds that
think (it) can’t lie!
In a world where cameras all
Yet someone watches
the Humans thrall
They that moniter get their say
The rest obliged no choice obey.
——-
-Original poem by me, written … now.
Not a one can move without