3 Dec
2014
3 Dec
'14
5:13 p.m.
Hi yar - I figured we might be able to get you to pipe in on this topic...
;-)
Back at the old sudo location, there were a few muggings right outside the
door. I remember there was some discussion at that time about under what
conditions a security camera might be acceptable. E.g. using strong
encryption, auto-erasing after some expiration date, and requiring multiple
keys to unlock the recordings.
Would those kinds of safeguards satisfy your concerns around video
surveillance? Did Sudo ever wind up installing a security camera at the
front door in the old location?
Patrik
PS: are there any particular security needs that La Commune needs help with
ASAP?
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:26 PM, yar <yardenack(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Patrik D'haeseleer
<patrikd(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
- How much video surveillance are we as a
community willing to tolerate?
Is
there an acceptable tradeoff between enhancing
personal and property
safety,
and respecting privacy? A static and
well-advertized camera trained at a
piece of valuable infrastructure may be OK. A building-wide surveillance
system that can track people from room to room with facial recognition
presumably isn't OK. Can we agree on where that boundary lies?
I'm never comfortable with any kind of video surveillance. If it's
just pointed at a machine in the corner of CCL or something I wouldn't
make a fuss, but if it's recording common areas or access routes I
would. Whether we run facial recognition is moot - if a digital image
exists, it will be run through facial recognition software sooner or
later. That's life in the botnet of things.
We should also note that La Commune has already been facilitating
conversations for their own security needs, which right now means
locking up bookshelves when they close the store. It would be really
good if we could help them ASAP.