Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

If a Technology was deveolped...


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1    ascendant606

ascendant606

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Middle Earth

  • "Despite contrary belief, knowledge is not power. Rather, the application of knowledge to real world situations is power"

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:35 AM

This is NOT a conspiracy, there is no such technology today being used like this. This is all hypothetical, so please no crazy conspiracy remarks

What if in the future a technology was developed that could see everything and was viewed by hired workers. Would it be moral for the government to use this technology? Whether you think yes or , how dnoo you think it would be run? Would there be local divisions of "watchers", and larger divisions and so forth depending on the severity of the case? Or do you think another system would be more affective.

If they did, it would allow them to anticipate terrorist attacks, stop crime and solve all criminal and court cases. There would no wrongly convicted criminals, no abused members of society and no bullies. This would also provide jobs for the people watching the videos,

On the other hand, if the government was corrupt false evidence could be put in place, things could be ignored and someone high enough could do almost anything they want. Also, there would be no privacy but what does it matter if they watch everyone?

Do you think it is moral or not?

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

― Albert Einstein

#2    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 8,054 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:03 AM

we need Jame bond 007!!!


#3    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:18 AM

Quote

This is NOT a conspiracy, there is no such technology today being used like this. This is all hypothetical

Yeah right...pfffft. were already being watched and yes they have paid workers to watch us. Some are even robotic for the cheap labor. You have not heard of face recognition CCTV cameras in your neighborhood ?


#4    ascendant606

ascendant606

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Middle Earth

  • "Despite contrary belief, knowledge is not power. Rather, the application of knowledge to real world situations is power"

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:32 AM

View PostAsteroidX, on 13 March 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Yeah right...pfffft. were already being watched and yes they have paid workers to watch us. Some are even robotic for the cheap labor. You have not heard of face recognition CCTV cameras in your neighborhood ?

Even if that is true, it wouldn't be quite what I was talking about. I was thinking more on a more specific level where everything was analyzed and seen, even on private property. As I mentioned (or at least I meant to) this is not possible in our current day and age due to government budget, and laws against violating private property.

Edited by ascendant606, 13 March 2013 - 10:33 AM.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

― Albert Einstein

#5    HDesiato

HDesiato

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:12 PM

I don't think a government that deprives citizens of privacy is serving their best interests.(so that's a no on the morality question)
This sounds to me like a prison scenario.
I imagine the high technology needed could be run with everyone connected via GPS to a computer program.
I would wonder, 'who watches the watchers'?
Perhaps medical nanobots could also function as motion capture via the GPS, making cameras unnecessary.



#6    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:35 PM

Quote

Even if that is true, it wouldn't be quite what I was talking about. I was thinking more on a more specific level where everything was analyzed and seen, even on private property. As I mentioned (or at least I meant to) this is not possible in our current day and age due to government budget, and laws against violating private property.

There are no Laws using tech to spy on Americans anymore. Satellites can read your license plate in your driveway and drones from 14k ft can detect heat sigs inside your home. They track movement of people with tech and can using satellites. They want to be abl;e to tell if a person is carrying a concealed weapon from drones at altitude or space satellites. I think your theoretical image is behind the times.

There  is an active resistence to this tech. As like you said its an invasion of privacy but it is real today.





Sponsored by DARPA go figure.

Edited by AsteroidX, 13 March 2013 - 10:43 PM.


#7    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:36 PM

Be prepared not misinformed...........

Edited by AsteroidX, 13 March 2013 - 10:48 PM.


#8    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:43 PM

Read the novel "1984" by George Orwell.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225

#9    Heaven Is A Halfpipe

Heaven Is A Halfpipe

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 914 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

  • Hi. My name is Spike.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 12:39 AM

Technology already exists.

You can go the distance, you can run the mile and you can walk straight through HELL with a smile.

My UM Credentials: http://www.unexplain...5


#10    ascendant606

ascendant606

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Middle Earth

  • "Despite contrary belief, knowledge is not power. Rather, the application of knowledge to real world situations is power"

Posted 14 March 2013 - 02:39 AM

View PostThe Skater Boy, on 14 March 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:

Technology already exists.

It may exist, but it is not put in use to the extent I was talking about.

View PostAsteroidX, on 13 March 2013 - 10:36 PM, said:

Be prepared not misinformed...........

Wha....? if your talking about my knowledge of technology, I am perfectly aware of the existance of technology, but rather that it is not seeing much practical use and it is not being used even close to the extent I was talking about.

View PostAsteroidX, on 13 March 2013 - 10:35 PM, said:

There are no Laws using tech to spy on Americans anymore. Satellites can read your license plate in your driveway and drones from 14k ft can detect heat sigs inside your home. They track movement of people with tech and can using satellites. They want to be abl;e to tell if a person is carrying a concealed weapon from drones at altitude or space satellites. I think your theoretical image is behind the times.

There  is an active resistence to this tech. As like you said its an invasion of privacy but it is real today.





Sponsored by DARPA go figure.

Umm... I will not debate the existance of the techonolgy anymore because it is not the intent of the thread, but rather how the technology would be applied and how it would work, along with the morality of using it. Thanks for the info though!  :tu:

View PostHDesiato, on 13 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:

I don't think a government that deprives citizens of privacy is serving their best interests.(so that's a no on the morality question)
This sounds to me like a prison scenario.
I imagine the high technology needed could be run with everyone connected via GPS to a computer program.
I would wonder, 'who watches the watchers'?
Perhaps medical nanobots could also function as motion capture via the GPS, making cameras unnecessary.

Although I don't disagree with you, I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say: How is this depriving citizens of privacy? If no one has privacy, then there can be no privacy to compare it to. You would not feel a lack of privacy because there is no privacy in this scenario. Is prison really that bad of a place if you're with your loved ones? Although, in prison you get free food in loging, in this society you would not.

I agree with you that some sort of nanotechnology would have to serve to monitor, visual is not enough to pick up clues as to what a possible criminal is up to.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

― Albert Einstein

#11    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,313 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:15 PM

Kinda reminds me of "Minority Report"


#12    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 13,048 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:29 PM

Technologies that enable government to spy on you also enable others who have access to the technology to do the same, and we would never know for sure had such access and so would never feel private, even if we trust the government.

Would lack of such privacy harm us?  I think so, in all sorts of ways.  It's not that we have things to hide, it's that we have things we cherish to ourselves.  I like dancing with myself when no one is around -- would I do that if I might be being filmed?  What about doing facial exercises in front of a mirror?  How about talking to our fish when we feed them?  How absurd, but there it is, and it must serve us some purpose to do these pointless things.  These are seemingly trivial, but I am sure if you think about it you can think of all sorts of similar things that our lives would end up abandoning.

Further, such technologies could serve to put us at a huge disadvantage in the market.  Let's say you are buying a car, and the dealer has a complete profile on you -- what you can afford, your religion and politics, your attitude about things like safety and economy and convenience and style, etc.  How could you possibly get a good bargain by acting disinterested when the salesperson knows you better than you know yourself?  Even in the supermarket, prices could be electronically adjusted up for things you need to buy, unfair but I know it would be done.  It's done now by certain internet marketers who get profiles on people and what they typically buy online.

Of course there is the other side to this coin.  The surveilance would make us safer, from criminals and from ourselves.  It would remind us to take our blood pressure pills and maybe when we haven't had enough sleep.  It might inform certain individuals, "You need to take a shower or you will be offensive to your co-workjers."  Now that is not such a bad idea so long as it happens to others and not to me.  Obviously someone drunk would not be allowed to drive -- not bad, but think a bit about other applications that must might become damn irritating.


#13    HDesiato

HDesiato

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania

Posted 14 March 2013 - 03:19 PM

View Postascendant606, on 14 March 2013 - 02:39 AM, said:

It may exist, but it is not put in use to the extent I was talking about.



Wha....? if your talking about my knowledge of technology, I am perfectly aware of the existance of technology, but rather that it is not seeing much practical use and it is not being used even close to the extent I was talking about.



Umm... I will not debate the existance of the techonolgy anymore because it is not the intent of the thread, but rather how the technology would be applied and how it would work, along with the morality of using it. Thanks for the info though!  :tu:



Although I don't disagree with you, I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say: How is this depriving citizens of privacy? If no one has privacy, then there can be no privacy to compare it to. You would not feel a lack of privacy because there is no privacy in this scenario. Is prison really that bad of a place if you're with your loved ones? Although, in prison you get free food in loging, in this society you would not.

I agree with you that some sort of nanotechnology would have to serve to monitor, visual is not enough to pick up clues as to what a possible criminal is up to.

Q: "Is prison really that bad of a place if you're with your loved ones?"  
A: Ever take a long road trip for a family vacation? lol

This is a kind of conditioning, by removing the peoples freedom and making it so they don't miss it to the point they are no longer aware of a life in which privacy existed,

Is this what you are implying?

The concept of privacy would still exist, at least among a citizens personal space in relation to one another.

The knowledge of being watched would bring resentment, if not by everyone then by a select few freedom fighters who would then become enemies of the state if they speak their mind.

Such a government would be sowing the seeds of its own downfall.
First privacy, then free speech, what next?


#14    spayneuter

spayneuter

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 132 posts
  • Joined:26 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Washington State

  • Live Long And Prosper.
    Please spay and neuter.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 05:29 PM

I don't have a problem with that for public venues.  But that wouldn't help crimes like child abuse.  There are nanny cams but no parent cams.

What a man dwells on, he becomes.

#15    ascendant606

ascendant606

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Middle Earth

  • "Despite contrary belief, knowledge is not power. Rather, the application of knowledge to real world situations is power"

Posted 14 March 2013 - 09:15 PM

View PostHDesiato, on 14 March 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

Q: "Is prison really that bad of a place if you're with your loved ones?"  
A: Ever take a long road trip for a family vacation? lol

This is a kind of conditioning, by removing the peoples freedom and making it so they don't miss it to the point they are no longer aware of a life in which privacy existed,

Is this what you are implying?

The concept of privacy would still exist, at least among a citizens personal space in relation to one another.

The knowledge of being watched would bring resentment, if not by everyone then by a select few freedom fighters who would then become enemies of the state if they speak their mind.

Such a government would be sowing the seeds of its own downfall.
First privacy, then free speech, what next?

I never thought of the road trip analogy, nice! :clap:

You nailed the privacy part spot on, but if one was raised thinking that they would always be seen by the camera's and they had expectations of having privacy from others, then it would be seen as two different things. For instance, today if we were really "free" then we would be bound be no laws or restraints, but that is not so. We do have laws and restraints, and we are raised to beileve that laws are something beyond freedom. The same would apply the camera-nanobot-thingamabob invading ones privacy, it would be seen as beyond privacy.

How would their freedom of speech be prohibited? they would still be able to speak their mind.

View Postspayneuter, on 14 March 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

I don't have a problem with that for public venues.  But that wouldn't help crimes like child abuse.  There are nanny cams but no parent cams.

The point of it is that there are "parent cams" and "nanny cams" and "everybody cams".

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

― Albert Einstein




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users