
What if Big Brother isn’t so bad after all? - privong
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/techknow/articles/2014/3/25/what-if-a-big-brotheraisnatsobadafterall.html
======
privong
> "A person or vehicle appears as a pixel, essentially a moving dot on the
> screen."

> "I was able to watch several killings caught on camera as they unfolded: ...
> a victim toppling to the ground"

It can't be both ways.

------
retrogradeorbit
CIA operative thinks Big Brother is 'not so bad after all'.

It's like the final paragraph of Orwell's 1984:

"He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what
kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless
misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two
gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right,
everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory
over himself. He loved Big Brother."

~~~
jrlocke
"He had won the victory over himself."

Orwell—magical.

~~~
dajohnson89
I didnt get that sentence, or the entire paragraph for that matter. Is there
some story-dependent context that I'm missing here, or am I just too dense for
Orwell?

~~~
lstamour
First off, it's really more profound than any little statement like this can
make it, and you're better off reading it for yourself. That said...

It's been years since I read it, but I'll put forth a few ways to read it,
though I'm probably wrong, as I said it's been awhile.

One is a sort of Stockholm syndrome, in which you come to see and appreciate
the others' point of view, but you're too close to see any of the drawbacks
that were obvious and clear to outsiders (readers?).

More literally speaking, the protagonist with every reason to hate the system
that even set up traps to catch its own "enemies," ends up convincing him that
it's necessary, hence, "He had won the victory over himself."

(Cue "Mission Accomplished" photo-op? Heh.)

------
louthy
> What if Big Brother isn’t so bad after all?

But what if it is? Try putting that genie back in the bottle. What about the
surveillance regimes of the past, like the Stasi? They were such successes
that we should use the modern technology we have today to add to the powers of
the elite?

Right.

------
workhere-io
I don't get those who say that this is disappointing coming from Al Jazeera.
Al Jazeera is run by a media group funded by the Qatari government. Qatar is
not a democracy, it's an absolute monarchy. Non-democracies tend to like Big
Brother-type scenarios because it keeps them in control.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_Media_Network](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_Media_Network)

------
neolefty
Is surveillance _always_ bad? From the reactions here, you'd think it is. But
that attitude will keep forcing surveillance underground. Any policy
discussions are going to be:

    
    
      "We need to watch people."
    
      "They will hate that."
    
      "Let's not tell them we're doing it then."
    

It would be far better to have it out in the open, transparent. That's only
going to happen if we are willing to talk about it constructively.

And although I'd rather not have my metadata collected by the NSA, I also
don't want to be knifed while I walk home, and it sounds like that second
scenario is what this surveillance system is trying to prevent.

*edit: formatting

~~~
locopati
Perhaps the first assertion isn't true. Perhaps we don't need to watch people
as much as or in the ways we think we do.

------
heygiraffe
So now Al Jazeera is kowtowing to the almighty surveillance state, too? This
is depressing.

------
line-zero
AlJazeera, I am disappointed.

~~~
lettergram
Al Jazeera is likely supported by the government, so I really don't understand
the surprise or disappointment.

------
pfortuny
What if Al Jazeera is not so bad after all?

Wait, what did I just say?

------
lettergram
Naturally from aljazeera

