Mary Browns Fried Chicken
Aboriginal Initiatives
Marlin Travel
Twice As Nice Thrift Store
Kowal Insurance Brokers
Wayne Toyota
Bill Martins
News
Click here to see more
Subscribe
Community Calendar
Click here for full listings.
Poll
Even though he has left the Conservative caucus, should Mike Duffy be forced to resign from the Senate?



Total Votes: 254
View Results Past Polls

Market Research

Do you own your own home?
Who's Modo
User Submitted Photo Gallery
Submit Your Own Photos
2012-08-13 at 21:18

Watching the streets: Council debates merits of police surveillance program

By Jeff Labine, tbnewswatch.com
Need a repair in a hurry?MINUTE MUFFLER has 8 service bays and specialize in Heavy Duty and Performance exhaust systems. Not just mufflers. Call 345-3441Click here for details.

Most residents would be willing to forfeit their freedom and rights if it meant safer streets, a councillor said.

City of Thunder Bay’s administration presented the latest numbers on the city’s Eye on the Street program as well as an overview of how well the program was fairing. The program, which features 16 police service cameras stationed in specific areas of the city, was created in an effort to deter criminal activity.

Cameras still in the Brodie Street and Victoria Avenue area continue to have the most suspicious activity caught on camera with 99 incidents recorded; an increase from last year’s 82 activities.The Water Street bus terminal recorded the second most suspicious activities with 71, followed by the intersection of Syndicate Avenue and Donald Street with 43.

But despite those numbers, the merit of the program was placed under scrutiny at city hall during Monday evening’s regular scheduled council meeting.

At-Large Coun. Aldo Ruberto defended the Eye on the Street, telling his fellow councillors that the cameras are another set of tools for police to use that isn’t meant to replace other crime prevention methods.

“People feel safer,” he said. “Whether that’s true or not true, they feel safer.

“Sometimes you are giving up your freedom of rights. If you had a choice between freedom of rights or safety, I think 90 per cent of people would choose safety. We can identify what actually happened. My question is when are we getting more and where are we going to put them? This is just another tool in the toolbox.”

Mayor Keith Hobbs wasn’t as confident that the cameras actually helped in preventing crime, and called the strategy reactive approach to solving the city’s crime problems. He added that the approach taken by the Crime Prevention Council is more of what the city needed.

Northwood Coun. Mark Bentz shared similar concerns. He said he didn’t want Thunder Bay to become another London, England, which is a city that has become the centrepiece of the surveillance debate because of its aggressive police camera program.

Bentz said he wanted more information to know if the cameras actually deterred crime.

“When you are spending a quarter of a million dollars, you have to be sure you are spending it the best way,” Bentz said.

“We could put out a thousand cameras out there because they are relatively cheap but is it a good idea?”


 

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.
iCar

Click here to report a typo or error

Tbnewswatch.com(67)

Comments

We've improved our comment system.
sky high says:
Are there any of these cameras at the marina to deter FOMP? I think it would be a great idea to have a few of these at the marina.
8/13/2012 9:22:34 PM
blaster says:
I remember when our business was broken into a few years ago and the police officer refused to even look at the "eye in the sky" video footage. Our store front was about 75-100 yards away from the cameras. We had around 5K damage and 5K of stolen products. On top of all this, one of the axes stolen from our store was recovered at the scene of an arson somewhere else in the city. Instead they sent a cop to check fingerprints when they had video of the whole thing.. so no, I would not be in favor of giving up my freedom of rights
8/13/2012 9:53:12 PM
wayne says:
for those who tuned into council meeting on shaw tonight, i found it amusing when Virdaramo as chair announced a switch to Angus as chair. Angus replied, "no sense in shuffling chairs on the Titanic"

I agree, council is a disaster!
8/13/2012 10:50:17 PM
Big Head says:
You want to have them at a bus stop or security cameras at City hall that's fine with me. But on any street? No! I don't need big brother watching me. For them to be effective they would have to be a high quality or they are a waste of time. Don't want them at all. We lose our freedom when that happens all over the city.
8/13/2012 10:51:57 PM
wayne says:
Ruberto said. “Sometimes you are giving up your freedom of rights. If you had a choice between freedom of rights or safety, I think 90 per cent of people would choose safety.”

Yep, I will forfeit my freedom of rights over safety, safety that our City is paid through our tax dollars to provide. I am not part of the 90% that Aldo Nova claims would give up their fundamental freedom of rights.

Hobbs promised two years ago to make Thunder Bay a safer community. EPIC FAIL!
8/13/2012 11:12:43 PM
Ring of Fire Dude says:
I would have to imagine that the 90% Aldo speaks of is a straw poll he took at Festa Italia . Sorry Aldo , your not speaking for me on loosing my freedoms and rights .
8/14/2012 9:07:17 AM
panzerIV says:
Police officers have used the footage to help them convict people who otherwise might have gotten away. Personally, I would like to see a small expansion of the project. I would like camera's at the marina for a set of eyes when a security guard isn't around.

The past 2 days Fire, EMS and police have been at the marina to deal with drunks (all before 930) the stage is becoming a hot spot for homeless and people crossing the country to sleep on (and in some cases use as a bathroom) and help to prevent vandalism.

In saying that Mr. Hobbs is right that this is purely reactive. We need more social programs, more addictions programs and housing programs. Cops spend most of the night dealing with drunks, going from A-B to deal with another drunk. There are a number of residents living in the shelter house simply because they cant find an affordable place.

These problems are bigger then Thunder Bay and everyone needs to come to the table willing to work.
8/13/2012 11:22:55 PM
wayne says:
what makes me 'nervous' is the number of times Foulds used the word 'nervous' during his two minute rant at city council tonight.
8/13/2012 11:51:30 PM
animiki says:
Mr. Ruberto's number--"90%" would give up "freedom of rights" (whatever that is) for "safety"--comes from where? Does he have the hard data to back up this statement? Or is this man, who is involved in making municipal policy, simply pulling numbers out of his...hat?

It would be nice to think that an elected official would arm himself with better information (as in, ANY information) to support his decisions. The bottom line is that the article offers nothing regarding how effective the cameras really are; they observe "suspicious activities", but so what? How about arrests, convictions, restitution to victims, etc? Sorry, Mr. Ruberto, you, like the article itself, left me hugely underwhelmed. Something to remember when the next election comes along, perhaps.
8/14/2012 12:08:37 AM
Sui Generis says:
"A city councillor says the majority of residents would give up their freedom of rights if it meant they would feel safer walking the streets."

Then that councillor is an idiot. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
8/14/2012 12:12:18 AM
young&concerned says:
Cameras or no cameras, I challenge anyone of our members of city council to walk down and hang out were these cameras are located…preferably near the end of the month and late at night. Hobbs how about one of your made famous “walk about’s” and shake some hands and see what is on the people’s mined.
8/14/2012 1:57:29 AM
hoboBOB says:
“People feel safer,” he said. “Whether that’s true or not true, they feel safer."

I'm confused. Can anyone make sense of that for me? Why does our counsel always have to speak in riddles?
8/14/2012 3:49:30 AM
The Badger Mountain Hermit says:
Buddy got his truck busted into. Cops wouldn't let him see any footage. They didn't want to understand why.
8/14/2012 5:18:59 AM
RelaxinginMurillo says:
"Eyes" on the public does deter a certain portion of crime.. but not all of it. Cameras in Macs, for example, probably deter some crime.. but obviously not all of it.
Habitual criminals will eventually be caught and convicted of something. The problem seems to be the revolving door afterwards.
Is the solution longer incarceration ? Some type of monitored geo-tagging ? Effective social 'retraining' ? Lots of debate there..
8/14/2012 7:07:22 AM
TWM says:
"Most residents would be willing to forfeit their freedom and rights if it meant safer streets, a councillor said"

This is a ridiculous statement. To have to give up rights and freedoms in order to have safe streets, is the wrong mentality. One that we all should reject outright.
8/14/2012 7:21:24 AM
unheard says:
Can the eye in the sky cameras be put online seeing how tax payers paid we should be able to watch
8/14/2012 7:34:57 AM
nvjgu says:
Oh really, when there spending 250k they want to make shure it's spent in the best way. So million buck's for two bent poles at the water front was proper when roads need to be compleatly dug up. Wounder how much it's costing to paint and repaint bike lanes on those awfull roads. Bike lanes that only last a short period and that few use. Or how about three people on a sunday no less driving around in a city half ton checking garbage can's, couln't they do that on monday with one person. There's money not well spent all over the place.
8/14/2012 7:45:27 AM
Mazda323 says:
I would agree with the first part of your post nvjgu but there are so many spelling and grammar mistakes, I'm not 100% sure what you really mean.
8/14/2012 8:30:25 AM
big joe mufferaw says:
Why would any law abiding citizen object to a recording of their activities. The fact that you object suggests you're doing something you don't want someone to see. What is it that you're doing in the streets that is so wrong you don't want it on camera?
8/14/2012 8:49:30 AM
TWM says:
right there... that statement is the very reason people object to cameras and invasion of privacy. presumption of guilt.
8/14/2012 9:19:58 AM
Sui Generis says:
So, by your logic, every post prior to yours was written by a criminal.

People object because they cherish the few rights we as citizens have left. I don't have to be doing something wrong to want my privacy and basic human rights protected.
8/14/2012 11:13:34 AM
random says:
"People object because they cherish the few rights we as citizens have left. I don't have to be doing something wrong to want my privacy and basic human rights protected."

Your joking right? You seriously think we have "few rights left"?

Name any rights that you no longer have, just one. Now name the rights you do have, and how your individual rights are more important than that of the whole. Citizens in EVERY other country in the world would kill to have our charter of rights and abuses, and you have the nerve to say we cherish what few rights we have left. Ridicuals post.
Baor nails it in his post below, you have NO right to privacy on a public street. The people of this country are spoiled.
8/14/2012 5:58:28 PM
tbayguy009 says:
Wow. You need to read up a LOT more.

First, the The Notwithstanding (section 33) permits elected legislatures (federal, provincial, or territorial) to declare that a particular action or law operates "notwithstanding" or "in spite of" a right or freedom found in the Charter.

So, charter violations CAN be allowed in law are ARE.

There are NUMEROUS examples and VOLUMES of law cases. And, most of the time the Charter loses.

RIDE check programs come to mind. In my opinion, that was one of the first big legal challenges to the Charter. Then came seatbelt checks. etc

The feds used to have laws permitting unwarrented entry into a persons house to check for firearms safety. There are numerous warrentless entry laws, which have nothing to do with the commision of a crime.

Always to relieve someone's 'perceived' fear not actual FACTS.

It is happening more and more, but the Charter is being shredded over time. How about internet monitoring???

Meanwhile 'breach of probation' is EVERYWHERE.
8/16/2012 3:19:13 PM
random says:
And don't you think that it would take extraordinary circumstances to effect that "notwithstanding"? Do you routinely see it put into effect? No.

RIDE programs are not a breach of any charter. You don't want to be momentarilly stopped to check for alcohol consumption on a public highway, then don't drive a motor vehicle. SIMPLE. The courts have ruled RIDE checks are not a violation.
The internet monitoring you mention isn't monitoring. What it gives police is something almost all ISP's provide anyways, sometimes with a warrant, sometimes without. It is to provide i.p identity for criminal offences, not monitoring for any criminal offences.
Spend a day in court and watch how the charter ISN'T being violated, instead of reading only what supports your side of an argument.
Lastly, link up the numerous case law you refer to, i'm dying to read it.
The only warrantless entries allowed are for situation's where life is in peril, that's it.
Nice try on the shredding of the charter bit.
8/16/2012 6:21:01 PM
random says:
Also (assuming my other post made it) keep in mind that there isn't an all seeing big brother sitting watching everyone. Every step the gov't or police take to increase their ability to do something is in direct relation to what people do, and how they escalate their behaviour. Yes the charter gives important freedoms, but when they are abused, and the abusers hide behind the charter, the powers that be need to increase their ability to combat the issue. The laws and amendments are always in response to what people DO.
This isn't China or North Korea, or even the U.S.A. We are nowhere near, nor will we ever be, to having our freedoms shredded away.
That is a weak argument. The freedom you cherish comes at a cost. You simply cannot have unlimited freedom and expect to live in a safe society, it isn't possible.
Do I want cameras everywhere? No. In heavy crime areas, YES.
8/16/2012 6:34:48 PM
stuck? says:
Nothing to hide but why does everything I do need to be recorded in the first place?

The world is starting to become the world of George Orwells 1984...
8/14/2012 2:00:04 PM
Anonymous94 says:
Are these good quality cameras that would allow police to identify the people making the streets unsafe? If not, why bother?

I think we need to first identify what is causing all of this crime, and move from there. There are reasons people act out, and if these reasons can be corrected, we will be left with safer streets. For example, If it's homeless people who are doing this because they need something, provide more shelters,

I personally don't think having camera's on the streets makes people feel safer, especially when they are under the impression that the footage isn't being used.

We as a community need to work together to make the streets safer. This is not the sole responsibility of council. We need to develop ideas that will work, and determine how to implement them, and then bring them to council to make them happen.

8/14/2012 9:07:24 AM
kurt says:
eye in the sky is a joke - period ! my store was broken into - had windows smashed - and we asked that the tape from the eye in the sky be looked at - and was told that its pointless because it was not detailed enough - just like the stupid lights at the marina - city council is smart --- to put up cameras that clearly do not do the job . period .
8/14/2012 9:28:14 AM
random says:
Someone care to explain exactly what rights are being given up? Freedom? How is freedom lost when there are security cameras set up to try to catch criminal acts? What freedom is lost? The freedom to walk along a street picking your nose and confident no one is watching?
Cameras watch you every day everywhere, either through private businesss or someone with a private phone camera etc.
Blaster, im calling B.S on your statement that the police "refused" to look at security footage. How do you know what they did after they left your business?
8/14/2012 9:59:33 AM
blaster says:
Your right, I don't know what the police did after they left. All I know is what they said to me at the time. "We will not be looking into the video footage." Call B.S all you want... Just sounded like they had more important things to do than tracking down a thief and an arsonist. Unfortunately the security cameras at Walmart probably put more people in jail than these "eye in the sky" cameras any day of the week. The reality is the city has to pay people to actually look at this footage. If you are unwilling to employ people to do this, what is the point of spending money on these cameras. Not to mention the city will be almost BANKRUPT after the bill comes in for the water treatment plant,.
8/15/2012 8:15:56 PM
theonlyopinionthatmatters says:
These cameras do nothing but push suspicious activities to where there are no or fewer cameras. Instead of Simpson st being hooker central it is now Court st.

8/14/2012 10:09:21 AM
chbaker says:
"Most residents would be willing to forfeit their freedom and rights if it meant safer streets, a councillor said"


Disgusting. Whichever one said it should be removed from office on grounds of treason.
Just terrible.
8/14/2012 10:31:02 AM
glock9 says:
Eye in the sky? You mean a target for children to throw rocks at.
8/14/2012 10:37:27 AM
TooShort says:
My two cents, Im in favor of having the cameras up not just to feel safe b/c I really dont but I think the good reason for the camera is to catch the bad guy/girl. So once there off the streets then yes Il feel lil safer, maybe! Yeah its not proactive but the cameras I hope are there to be reactive and sometimes we just need that in place no city is perfect but at least we could have a lil extra help out there. So ya I agree put a few up in/ near the Marina.

PS. I like the comment on the million dollar signal poles; where ya we need better roads, these roads are horrible !!!!!!!!!
8/14/2012 10:40:27 AM
DJ Frazer says:
This is definitely a good thing! I would vote for a camera on every light post and a 24 hour live monitoring station to fight crime. Don't be silly about loosing freedom, it's not like they are invading your privacy. I mean, anyone can see you out in public, so what difference does it make if they do it through a camera??
8/14/2012 11:15:11 AM
young&concerned says:
Of course Hobbs does believe/approve of these cameras because it clearly depicts who and what the problems are in this city.
8/14/2012 12:19:11 PM
shutter bug says:
It's about time!


8/14/2012 1:06:15 PM
baor says:
No one has the right to privacy on a public place IE: a sidewalk or street. Never have. I could walk around all day with a video camera, film people walking about and post it on line and all perfectly legal. If you're not a law breaker, who cares?
8/14/2012 3:10:24 PM
animiki says:
Privacy does not equal secrecy. I simply don't trust the state to use or safeguard recordings of me involved in even innocuous, legal activities. Once it's recorded, it can be used in any number of ways--fused with other data, used to draw incorrect conclusions, and result in me being persecuted by the state (or the government, or "the man"...anyway, whatever you want to call it) unjustly and incorrectly. I'd suggest reading to see a well-reasoned arguments as to why the "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about" argument is flawed and fallacious.

As for you recording me...well, if you're just you, then you're right; moreover, frankly, I don't care. There's very little you can do with such video that would concern me. However, if you're an agent of the state, well, then, yeah...I again have a problem with it. The state needs tight controls on information it collects; you, not so much.
8/14/2012 6:47:38 PM
baor says:
Oh please...do you really think the that you so important that the state would manipulate images of you walking along May and Victoria at 130am? Really? Go watch a Bourne movie.
8/16/2012 1:35:05 PM
jimmyboy says:
One seriously has to laugh out loud at this statement...“When you are spending a quarter of a million dollars, you have to be sure you are spending it the best way,” Bentz said.

Too bad he did not have that train of thought all this time while he headed up the waterfront committee in relation to the 100 or so million $$$$ spent there...especially the cool 1 million blown on the beacons in the name of art.!

Too bad our local yokel politician's do not even come close to practicing what it is they are constantly preaching....they all are getting so very old so very fast with these lame statements!
8/14/2012 3:14:16 PM
westfortscum says:
If there had been 99 arrests instead of recorded incidents then the streets would be a lot cleaner. They do not say if these incidents go with arrests. The reason I say this is because I always see the same people on the corner of Brodie and Victoria still slinging their drugs. I definitely don't feel safer because of these camera's, I would feel safer if the police ran the bikers out of this city once and for all.
8/14/2012 4:11:14 PM
tsb says:
I don't think the police care about the drug dealers. If they did, they'd have done something about the bar at that corner. Simpson Street improved greatly when Newfies Pub relocated. Thunder Bay will improve greatly when it gets shut down.
8/14/2012 8:10:37 PM
The Cougar says:
Funny, all these cameras and you havent caught sight of me yet!
8/14/2012 4:48:01 PM
nvjgu says:
LOL, people have to much time on their hand's when they come on here to check spelling and grammer.
8/14/2012 5:16:52 PM
hadenough says:
Lots of people make spelling and grammar through haste while trying to make their point.
In your case however it's a wonder they ever let you out of grade school. Your posts are so horrific in this regard I'm surprised that Mazda323 took the time to read them at all.
Have a little pride in what you write,use spell check to help.
This may explain why your resume gets tossed so often and you're sleeping in your parents basement.
8/15/2012 8:25:13 AM
stuck? says:
It had to be said....

You misspelled grammar!
8/15/2012 10:08:23 AM
TWM says:
If you want cameras mounted so that your every move is video taped, fine. If you need a police cruiser on every city block, fine. If you need the military standing on every street corner carrying an AK47 to feel safe, that's up to you. Personally, I hope you get what you ask for.
8/14/2012 5:58:09 PM
Despicable_Me says:
The problem with camera's is that (as an example from London) can sometimes see right into people's homes. Which is an invasion of privacy. As many have said if the videos are so poor quailty and the public has no access to it, what is the point? It's just counsel ASSUMING we feel safer, yet give us no access to said safety. More than one has said they were not allowed to see the video, why is this? Lets just waste more money on cameras, instead of fixing the problem. Obviously the Marina was a flop, and the roads are awful, but hey! Lets build build a supercenter, condos and ignore the real problem in this city. Addiction, homelessness, and mental illness. Camera's will fix it! Really! It will! ^_~
8/14/2012 6:27:54 PM
jimmyboy says:
Very accurate and spot on posts by "Wayne"...I cannot believe HOBBS of all people would not see any value in having these camera's in place...they have been shown to be effective and worth while in more cities than I could possibly list here is this forum...keeping in mind they are only a part of the solution to the problem, they are not the catch all what so ever...oops I and poster "Wayne" used HOBBS name in our comments...be on the lookout for "TBDR" comebacks.!

As "panzerIV" pointed out...there is a problem with drunks down at our new 100 million dollar Marina...what a turn-off these individuals are...but they are every where in both downtown cores as well...this problem has grown larger in Thunder Bay over the years, larger than most are willing to admit and city council are depending on the cities drug strategy to solve it...we have not see much mileage out of this group to date.!

When we get down to Aldo Ruberto...hey come on folks we all know that he is definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer...that is a given on any day....but alas he is not alone there...they do walk amongst Aldo as well.!
Councillor Foulds just loves to hear himself talk....unfortunately in viewing the council meetings which rarely ever are broadcast on time from the meetings beginning by Shaw Cable...which was again typical of last evenings meeting...I often ask myself how difficult is it too get this right anyway....we have no choice to listen to Foulds rambling commentary....I have to admit he does have a flare for DRAMA without question.
On most evenings these meetings seem to be filled with confusion and a whole lot of descension all the way around.....maybe mayor HOBBS should seek out some course work on PEER alignment...it couldn't hurt.

The post from "Big Joe mufferaw" has a lot of merit to what he asks...as well Thunder Bay as a city has a lot of tax money that is not well spent in a vast number of of ways.....I see 2 police officers riding around the city at 4 PM daily as one example....I can see 2 officers to a car during the evening hours...but not in broad daylight.....I would hope they do not require another officer holding their hands during this time of day...and I would love to hear the police departments explanation why this is the way it is.!

And in closing...to poster "hoboBOB"...our city council is one large riddle....that in my opinion Einstein nor any of the great minds in this world could not easily solve on any given day.!
8/14/2012 7:14:14 PM
passlake says:
we already have 110,000 cameras in the city.

It's called your neighbours.

And it's free!!

I'm proud to be part of the 10%.
8/14/2012 8:10:23 PM
brooky says:
You won't find me hanging out where any of these cameras are located. So my safety is not a concern for me. On the hand, if a bunch of street thugs want to beat the crap out of each other on an almost daily basis, why should I pay to monitor this? The cops will find them at daylight, which is fine by me.
8/14/2012 8:19:57 PM
wayne says:
a surveillance society is never a good thing

what's next? wiretapping/interception of landline and wireless calls without warrants?

big brother monitoring and having access to ALL internet and email activity?

perhaps cameras on the street with audio recordings?

8/14/2012 9:21:27 PM
wayne says:
"Joe Blow's smart meter shows a spike in electricity consumption during the heatwave...it may be due to increased use of fans or cranking up the A/C and dehumidifiers, but to be safe let's report this 'suspicious' activity to the authorities because Joe may be running a grow-up in his house. Perhaps the police should be advised to tap his phone lines and monitor his online activity."
8/14/2012 9:36:16 PM
wayne says:
and for those who text, tweet, update FB from wireless devices. be careful of what you text/post, because your wireless service provider keeps those records for a period of time. even a joke about drugs, 'suspicious' activity is being logged.

oh, and google searches are also logged for I believe 180 days. so be cautious of your innocent search queries....lol

yep, in the digital era, big brother is always watching, reading and listening.

that's the fact, not paranoia speaking
8/14/2012 10:14:37 PM
wayne says:
baor, aside from the media, posting videos online (youtube, FB, whatever) would be fine, as long as you don't add your own libelous commentary. but why you would record video of people walking in public and post it online is kinda twisted...lol

8/14/2012 11:06:33 PM
baor says:
lol. Not saying I would just saying it is perfectly legal....one has no right to privacy in that sense when they are in the public domain.
There is no way these cameras have negatively impacted any innocent person in this city since they were installed. Those who say otherwise are conspiracy theorist types who should likely stay inside anyways ... or lawbreakers who have been caught. I personally never ever give them a thought...until now.
8/16/2012 1:30:49 PM
westfortscum says:
Everyone is complaining about freedoms when a camera is present, what about all the other cameras everywhere else to catch criminals. These cameras are there to catch criminals, not impede on our freedoms. I still feel free as ever with or without these cameras. People only say these things because the news is saying that your not free with cameras everywhere. What about all these phones with cameras on them. Don't feed into the hype, these cameras are there for our safety.
8/15/2012 10:02:45 AM
The Badger Mountain Hermit says:
"Poke-You-In-the-Eye" Cameras and a Police Force that wears horse-blinders. Fantastic. George Orwell was A PROPHET.
8/15/2012 10:41:29 AM
stuck? says:
It brings a few tears to my eyes knowing that people are *finally starting* to realize what the hell is up in this digital age.

Cell phones, cameras, internet, etc etc are all tracking our every move. Cameras and cell phone cams generally come with geo-tagging enabled thus embedding geographical information to you: pictures, text messages, videos, QR codes, webpages, etc etc.

You don't need somebody to "tag" you in a post on Facebook... you can just read the geo-tag information and get a bit of information that way and do some old fashioned detective work.

Also, there are bots all over the internet that scour for information; they dig up your photo's on facebook or some post your username made back in 2007 on some anime forum.

While this can be GOOD for some things such as crime prevention/solving and the likes, I think there's a much more sinister reason behind it.

Yeah we want to watch everything you do to make you "safer". Not keep tabs on you in case something bad happens.
8/15/2012 1:04:06 PM
Tom Sanderson says:
lol
This has been happening since the beginning of internet usage. It's not new information by any means. Google has and is improving on their methods of profiling every user that has or uses any of their apps. Every search you make is stuffed into your personal profile so beware of what you search for.
8/15/2012 1:49:33 PM
stuck? says:
Thanks for regurgitating what I just said.

Yes this has been "known" since the beginning of the internet, and espionage tactics even longer.

Although I'm willing to bet my life that the majority of people using the internet, phones, gps etc are UNAWARE of what information is being collected and used.

Not everybody is in the know like you or I may be.
8/16/2012 1:01:42 PM
RelaxinginMurillo says:
Heck, people still use all their 'points' cards like as if they're getting something for free.. and not actually trading personal profile tracking for trinkets.
8/17/2012 10:09:17 PM
stuck? says:
I realized the very last sentence of my post completely made no sense or contradicted itself so... pretend you didn't read it, or pretend that it makes sense :)
8/15/2012 1:04:56 PM
wayne says:
so baor, you have no problem with anyone visually recording you in the public domain (without your awareness and permission) and doing whatever they want with said material without your consent?

It may be 'legal', but does that make it right?

8/16/2012 9:51:19 PM
baor says:
Go ahead. I've nothing to hide and I'm not that interesting...neither are you.
Besides, in today's age it has already likely happened to you and I both.
If you have the "freedom" to be out in public then I have the "freedom" to film you doing so. Why should one "freedom" trump the other.
What on earth are you worried about? What do you think is going to happen?
8/18/2012 11:45:12 PM
mercy mercy me says:
some one should tell Aldo that it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought of as a fool, rather than spew nonsense and confirm it
8/17/2012 6:10:19 PM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Forgot password?
Log In
 
 
© 2013 Dougall Media.