How Far Do We Go? — GPS and Surveillance Issues

Here’s an interesting quote that could have been written recently about the US, but wasn’t.

Many of our civil liberties concerns are justified, but we are in danger of whingeing, not sleepwalking our way into a surveillance society. When we have arrogant motorists complaining about speed cameras while supporting the serving of Asbos on, if not the public flogging of, miscreant youths who scratch the paintwork of their cars, and millions are happy to give up privacy in return for supermarket loyalty card points, how are we supposed to defend fundamental freedoms?

How do we challenge public complacency, and the all too common “If you’ve nothing to hide … ” attitude? For a start, it’s vital that civil liberties campaigners and journalists continue to speak out clearly and passionately, but broadsheet national newspaper scribblings and appearances on Newsnight are not nearly enough. We need far more campaigning within the community, especially on issues such as CCTV and anti-social behaviour that have a high local profile. We should also be discussing more what kind of society we want to live in, and not continually complaining about what we are against.  Full Article Here

It’s a very well-reasoned editorial from the Guardian, UK.  I’d strongly suggest taking the time to read it.  My friend Tim Hibbard has written recently on these sort of issues and so has Professor Jerome Dobson, President of the American Geographic Society … Dobson uses the term “Geoslavery” to describe the advance of GPS tracking and various other systems, public and private that are indeed areas of concern for potential misuse.

“What we are suggesting,” Dobson said, “is that we are only one technological step from placing a transponder in there that burns or stings a person if they step off a prescribed path by a meter. Or if they stay too long in one place. Or cross the path of another person they are prohibited from seeing, or if they congregate with other people.

“I can confine you to a place. You can’t go there. Or you must go there. And I can control it.”

Now as a practitioner in the field and a former dealer in hardware and services there’s no doubt I would fall into the “enthusiast” category.  Those who urge much greater caution certainly have their own very valid viewpoints.

The chief problem as I see it is well stated in the Guardian article.  It’s not enough to be “for” or “against” the technology.  The US and many other countries these days seem almost paralyzed in the area of intelligent thought by polarization.  Being rabidly opposed, an “aginer” is fine, but you can’t stop the tide.  You can be “against”  world hunger too, but no matter how adamantly opposed you may be you won’t feed a single person without rational planning and (often overlooked) taking action.

The technology is already well advanced and expanding at a rate that is near exponential.  What we need is thoughtful planning to figure out how to take maximum advantage while, at the same time, making minimal intrusion into people’s lives.

This is much more than an issue about GPS tracking.  Today the government as well as unknown numbers of businesses are able to track where you last ate dinner, what library books you read, what brand of beans you bought at the supermarket and even what special dietary meal you bought on your last airline flight.  Are you against this level of intrusion?  Fine, but what alternatives are available?

I’m a registered Independent voter but I make no secret of the fact I was pleased with the recent mid-term elections.  But do you suppose there is a single successful candidate from those elections who will even have a position on these issues, much less help to forge a national policy?  I hope so, but I’ve yet to see one, Republican or Democrat.