[extropy-chat] Wearable Camera Etiquette

Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. megao at sasktel.net
Thu Apr 15 23:41:12 UTC 2004

Some sort of ID  has to incorporated into or broadcast from each individual
/thing and
the recording devices must seek out a "tag"  for these pieces of information
or they will record
the data faithfully, but simply modify the regurgitation with privacy
protocals.  Authorities may have an override on these protocals for law
enforcement uses.

Consider the ways already used to selectively filter unauthorized use of
information by simply reducing the quality or resolution of the reused

-The blurring of television  images of faces within otherwise normal video.
-The garbeling of voices from whom privacy is requested
-The introduction of low resolution/scrambling  into GPS signals for
civilian use.

Yes you will be able to record everything, but you may not be able to show
it in any usable fashion
without permission tags from those whose information you recorded.

Printed matter with RFID tags in the book binding  would refuse to convert
to text or be re-broadcast in a readable fashion unless the recording system
sensed a permission for free use


Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> On Thursday, April 15, 2004, at 02:36 pm, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 14, 2004, at 7:50 PM, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> >>>> - don't record while using the phone where you can break
> >>>> wiretapping laws
> >>>
> >>> We need to get to a society quickly where it is assumed that
> >>> everything witnessed by any person was "remembered" in full fidelity
> >>> and is fully shareable with others.   Anything less than this limits
> >>> all of us.
> >>
> >> This sounds good to some people, but I am sure there are other people
> >> who do not desire this.  We need a society that allows both choices
> >> to coexist with each other.  I don't think people fear other people's
> >> technology as much as they fear it will impose itself on people who
> >> don't want it.
> >>
> >
> > Should some people's desire to limit the capabilities of other people
> > to what they are comfortable with be honored?   I don't see why or how
> > doing so could be compatible with freedom to enhance one's own life
> > and capabilities.
> I understand that you don't want people imposing their limitations on
> you.  But can you see how your vision of the future imposes new
> limitations on others?  They currently can hold private conversations
> while at dinner or in their car.  Your future has people using
> technology to listen in on these conversations not intended to them,
> and limits people's capabilities to talk normally.  You will stop them
> from doing what they are already capable of now.  They also will resent
> this new limitation and fight against it.  Their will claim that you
> are limiting them, just as you claim the reverse would be limiting you.
>   I suspect that society will (at least initially) side with the
> majority/older capabilities over minority/new capabilities.
> What I am saying is that we need a way to introduce the new
> capabilities without destroying people's already existing capabilities.
> > We need to enable people to augment their abilities AND enable people
> > to have some level of privacy and control over what is done with their
> > information trail.
> I think we are pretty much agreed in our goals.  There will be a lot of
> friction as technology becomes more imposing on others.
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec
> Manager,
> NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list