this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2025
70 points (89.8% liked)

Technology

77873 readers
3134 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Amoxtli@thelemmy.club -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

You need surveillance. How are you going to catch criminals? It is a crucial piece of evidence. We demand cops turn on their bodycams for accountability. Imagine how much more crime and corruption cops would get away with if there was no surveillance. Think… Think… Think…

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

You are so close to getting it.

Define “criminals.”

[–] SnoringEarthworm@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is how people justify surveillance states.

What you actually get is "accountability for thee, none for me", because people with power get to turn the cameras off whenever they want.

Just look at !Epsteinfiles@lemmy.world to see how easy for people with money and power to [REDACTED].

We don't need (state) surveillance (on citizens).

We need (citizen) surveillance (on the the state).

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The problem is the state, not the surveillance. Surveillance does have legitimate societal benefits, but like any tool what matters is how it's used.

[–] SnoringEarthworm@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I agree that the (primary) problem is the state.

We're talking about surveillance in the context of a surveillance empire, not just cops having bodycams (that they they can turn off at will).

Surveillance at scale is like giving a chronic pain patient a freezer full of fentanyl.

With perfect discipline, it's not a problem. It's effective pain medication that they'll only use when they need it.

They will always find excuses to "need" it.

After all, why not?