Surveillance is growing at an exponential rate across the globe. While there are many supporters of this advancement there are many who are critical of the use of this ever-growing technology. Please debate the impact of surveillance digitally through the comment windows below to contribute to your teams oral debate. points will be given for valid points based on evidence from your readings.
Let the debate begin!!
Crime has decreased by 3.2% which is more than it used to be. With the Manage-us system and Evaluate-us system watching stores and governments the crime will decrease.
ReplyDeleteyes but what if hackers destroyed the security of surveillance and increased the crime
ReplyDeletehackers are always one step ahead of the technology.
ReplyDeletethere will be more than one camera that has the footage so that crimes will be solved as a camera catches an individual over 300 times a day
ReplyDeletebut technology has increased rapidly and has the ability to track these hackers down.
ReplyDeleteBeing spotted over 300 times a day may create paranoia and why do innocent people need to be watched?
ReplyDeleteBut if they are innocent people, then what's so bad about them being watched? Why would they be paranoid if they have nothing to hide?
ReplyDeletehow do you know that.
ReplyDeletethe government doesn't care about your everyday life. They only care if you are doing something you shouldn't or acting suspicious
ReplyDeleteevery grandparent I know never thought they needed surveillance.
ReplyDeleteIt is known because if they are innocent, as Kalei stated, then they would have nothing bad to hide.
ReplyDeletebut what if they miss took you for a terrorist.
ReplyDeleteonce the crime is done the crime is done.
ReplyDeleteFace scanners have been created to detect out of the ordinary behaviour. What if they are wrong? What if this person is just nervous about something like a job interview?
ReplyDeleteYou would be interviewed and double checked for what has happened so you wouldn't be put in jail right away.
ReplyDeleteWhat if the police don't believe them and put them behind bars?
ReplyDeleteIf your mum was put behind bars and you knew she did nothing wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe technology we have now like pattern miners ect would be able to check everything you've done. It also can track any criminal records.
ReplyDeleteWith everything (facial recognition, being able to collect data from phones/emails etc, cameras, dna, fingerprints, criminal record) it is very accurate when solving crimes so barely anyone will be put in jail for a crime they didn't do. Surveillance helps solve these crimes and to find the right person.
ReplyDeleteWhat if someone had made your criminal record not so clean?
ReplyDeleteIf someone was getting mugged and surveillance caught it, by the time the police force get their the mugger will be gone. And won't they try to go in a place without surveillance?
ReplyDeleteWith so many cctv cameras all their movement would be tracked so they can find them and follow them to where they are now
ReplyDeleteWhat if they are by a place with no cctv?
ReplyDeletethere are other ways of surveillance apart from cctv such as mentioned above
ReplyDeleteAll this high tech surveillance is costing so much, money is being wasted when it could go to a good cause, think of the starving kids in Africa. For example the Safe Cities Program is said to cost $1.2 billion, with 500,000 cameras involved.
ReplyDelete59 countries have drones so most people would be tracked.
ReplyDeleteYes, but surveillance can help shops and businesses by tracking how many people/what kind of people buy their products, giving them more chances to make money.This helps the economy growth and will be able to afford the surveillance technology.
ReplyDeleteWhy do they need to know what people like, we buy what we buy. And we could be fundraising for something more meaningful
ReplyDeleteWhen Callum said we need more surveillance if we don't have enough for it to work. Well the government can't afford more so if it's not doing the job why have it?
ReplyDeleteYea, we are spending more than we make
ReplyDeleteWith shops earning money a percentage of it goes to the Government allowing them to use it on needs to there country or other countries
ReplyDeleteAll the money we pay in tax, that money could be decreased if we took out surveillance and economy would flourish.
ReplyDeleteBack to what Kalei said, what evidence do you have that we are spending more than we make?
ReplyDeleteOnly 3.2% crimes are being solved, aren't we spending more than what 3.2% solves crimes?
ReplyDelete3.2% is worth?*
ReplyDeleteSurveillance is need in this would to track down criminals, business and commerce to monitor peoples activity to place there shop in the right place.
ReplyDeletewhat money are we making from surveillance?
ReplyDeleteBut without surveillance, there wouldn't be that 3.2% of crimes solved.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't you rather have 3.2% of crimes solved than none at all leaving criminals on the lose roaming around cities and towns.
ReplyDeleteBack to what Luke said, if their business is good then people will try to find it. Why don't they just advertise?
ReplyDeleteIf they are roaming won't they get caught anyway?
ReplyDelete3.2% is nothing when you see how many crimes are comitted, thats like a ratio of 1:100
ReplyDeleteThe Government is making money from setting up prime position for shops using surveillance.
ReplyDeleteBut 3.2% is more than 0%
ReplyDeleteThen what are they using that money for? Surveillance?
ReplyDeleteand could solve larger crimes than smaller crimes such as stealing a lollie
ReplyDeleteIts actually a ratio of 1:10000
ReplyDeleteStill more than 0...
ReplyDelete3.2% of 10000 is not 1 so there is more crimes solved
ReplyDeleteRemember, stay on topic.
ReplyDelete