Mass surveillance is surveillance of the masses, not surveillance by the masses.
It’s what NSA does, not what a bunch of Google geeks in Palo Alto do.
And the individual right to record what they see fit is subject to restrictions, of course. We can discuss what these restrictions might or should be, but that’s not what I was talking about.
Mass surveillance is surveillance of the masses, not surveillance by the masses.
It’s what NSA does, not what a bunch of Google geeks in Palo Alto do.
And the individual right to record what they see fit is subject to restrictions, of course. We can discuss what these restrictions might or should be, but that’s not what I was talking about.
Surveillance by the masses makes surveillance of the masses trivially easy.
Only if the masses conveniently store all their audio and video records in locations that you can easily and cheaply access.
Which they/we currently do. Generally, accessing recording and data is easy compared with recording it in the first place.
If the masses are surveilling than you also have surveillance of the masses.
Mass surveillance—of the masses—is a reality right now and has been for many years.
Surveillance by the masses is a possibility that may or may not happen in the future in the form that we don’t know and can only speculate about.