Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I ask, safety from what? From citizens or the state? Your statement implies that the freest societies are the least "safe", and the most repressed are the "safest". While you might be able to hinder criminality on the part of citizens with total surveillance, the cost of giving anyone that kind of power is too high.

Relinquishing privacy puts a society on a path where all power accrues to the state, to the detriment of all citizens.




I agree to most, but because solutions like facial recognition are simply easier to engage than educational reforms or welfare-based safety [sic] nets, this is not necessarily something we get to choose.

States will prefer the former to the latter and firms will provide, at which point I don't think that the definition of safety-from is necessary.


> States will prefer the former to the latter and firms will provide, at which point I don't think that the definition of safety-from is necessary.

I do believe that, at some point, people will as well. If other options prove too expensive or too inefficient, it's not just states that will prefer near complete mass surveillance.




Registration is open for Startup School 2019. Classes start July 22nd.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: