Comrade Dan's government has covertly intorduced a new level of surveillance?

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

I would question if your problem was actually with the law/regulation or the use of camera? I still don't get it. Is that like saying "I know its illegal to run a red light, but I oppose cameras set up to catch red light bandits because...."

Did you miss the bit where the ADF blocked The Chairman?

“Commander of the Defence COVID-19 task force Lieutenant General John Frewen said the proposal was not 'the right thing for us to be supporting at the time”

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by FairmontGS

Did you miss the bit where the ADF blocked The Chairman?

“Commander of the Defence COVID-19 task force Lieutenant General John Frewen said the proposal was not 'the right thing for us to be supporting at the time”

I don't see the link to "sinister" use of cameras. There were lots of things the ADF thought wasn't the right thing to support at that point in time e.g. manning hotel floors, manning checkpoints.

Anyway....I'll start to hide under my bed when they start introducing precogs

[Rallye Sport]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

Cameras have been present in Melbourne for many decades. What concerned me is that this new level of surveillance was introduced without informing the public.

Interesting... I notice a few people were captured in the picture of the camera.

Were they informed they were being recorded/ photographed?

Theres that irony again.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

I think that is a very fair point. The public should be informed if they are being recorded in public. At the very least there should be signs around the area.

Are we assuming there was no notice, what do you want the Gov to do door knock everyone for every update to infrastructure?

And if there were signs again what difference would that make? There are signs for everything these days they would just become part of the scenery.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

I don't see the link to "sinister" use of cameras.

Did you miss the bit where the ADF felt that the Chairman’s request was inappropriate?

[wodahs]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Are we assuming there was no notice, what do you want the Gov to do door knock everyone for every update to infrastructure?

And if there were signs again what difference would that make? There are signs for everything these days they would just become part of the scenery.

yep i can see it

a sign to say please read the sign ahead

a sign to say did you miss the sign you just passed if so please go back and read it

a sign to say be ware of the sign for safety purpose

and then all the safety signs to accompany the normal signs

oh and then so not to be discriminating there'd have to be a similar amount of safety cones to make sure that if some one doesnt notice the sign post they dont end up walking in to it

[au2000]

Speaking of old comrade dan....... anyone seen him or has he defected ?

[JasonACT]

(Ok, you may notice I post images of Alfred E. Neuman sometimes... So, yeah, I saw one of these in Mad Magazine back in the early 80's. Good memories, actually, these days my only truly solid memories.)

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by leesa

My question was what did you want to discuss about the cameras, if their contribution to city safety (or not) for women in particular is off-topic, then what?

I'd still argue that the cameras contribute to safety via deterrence. How many people are likely to try grab someone infront of those cameras now? Probably fewer than if the cameras weren't there at all. Sounds like a contribution to safety to me.

In this day and age I don't think cameras act as any deterrence at all, they are good for traffic management and only good for the law after a crime has been committed in tracking down offenders.
Majority of offenders don't think twice about a camera presence in carrying out their crimes.
To all victims of murder rape bashings etc it did not stop the crime from happening at all; think about it.

[Charliewool]

https://youtu.be/oeT5otk2R1g

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by FairmontGS

Did you miss the bit where the ADF felt that the Chairman’s request was inappropriate?

It's behind a paywall and I'm not subscribed to this arm of uncle Rupert's propaganda

Inappropriate for what reason? Where is the sinister intent?

If I remember correctly, getting any meaningful help for vic from Ms Reynolds at the time was "inappropriate".

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

Inappropriate for what reason? Where is the sinister intent?

I dunno, but the ADF's decision is out there on the public record as fact. Repeatedly asking me why isn't going to get much of an answer

I initially viewed this thread as a bit of jolly fun where we could make some outrageous claims but The Chairman does seem to have a bit of form. A few items that floated up when Googling:

Police using facial recognition cameras at Victoria's busiest stations
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/v...20-p53m0e.html

Victoria police distances itself from controversial facial recognition firm Clearview AI
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...m-clearview-ai

Documents reveal AFP's use of controversial facial recognition technology Clearview AI
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-...ealed/12451554

Victoria Police admits officers trialled Clearview AI facial recognition tool
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/victo...on-tool-549432

[Citroënbender]

Problems arise when this practice is conjoined with creeping reversal of the “onus of proof” and cemented with enshrined secrecy around what should be public proceedings.

I suggest the “rot” began when governments decided it was acceptable to employ covert measures in the pursuit of revenue from offences without premeditation. Once deceit was legitimised, the boundaries were all lowered. I understand that in all states there are ongoing abuses of secure processes, some actions may be more harmful than others.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Citroënbender

Problems arise when this practice is conjoined with creeping reversal of the “onus of proof” and cemented with enshrined secrecy around what should be public proceedings.

I suggest the “rot” began when governments decided it was acceptable to employ covert measures in the pursuit of revenue from offences without premeditation. Once deceit was legitimised, the boundaries were all lowered. I understand that in all states there are ongoing abuses of secure processes, some actions may be more harmful than others.

Are you talking about Sydneys phone camera's ?

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by FairmontGS

I dunno, but the ADF's decision is out there on the public record as fact. Repeatedly asking me why isn't going to get much of an answer

I initially viewed this thread as a bit of jolly fun where we could make some outrageous claims but The Chairman does seem to have a bit of form. A few items that floated up when Googling:

Police using facial recognition cameras at Victoria's busiest stations
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/v...20-p53m0e.html

Victoria police distances itself from controversial facial recognition firm Clearview AI
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...m-clearview-ai

Documents reveal AFP's use of controversial facial recognition technology Clearview AI
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-...ealed/12451554

Victoria Police admits officers trialled Clearview AI facial recognition tool
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/victo...on-tool-549432

LOL too funny. I asked why CCTV security cameras bothered people so much and what sinister intent they think Gov has, and you reply with some links without knowing why I thought you were implying there was some mal-intent there.

Clearview AI – Clearview.ai
https://clearview.ai
Clearview AI is a new research tool used by law enforcement agencies to identify perpetrators and victims of crimes. Clearview AI's technology has helped law enforcement track down hundreds of at-large criminals, including pedophiles, terrorists and sex traffickers.

Ridding our streets of these scums would be OK by me.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

I thought you were implying there was some mal-intent there.

Nup, just reporting the ADF decision. But we got there... eventually

[Trendseeker]

I think CCTV cameras in public places are a deterrent and improve safety. It doesn’t stop crime completely because the criminals overlook the presence of cameras that aren’t in obvious places.

It is possible to overdo it though. I drive past the house in the photo below once in awhile. When I first saw the cameras years ago, I thought it could be a criminal figure’s stronghold. Then I wondered if the owner had some kind of phobia. I drove past it again the other day and it has even more cameras than you can see in the photo, which I copied from Streetview. I’d take a current photo but the cameras discourage me from going near it. Maybe that’s the point.



And here is the view of the backyard; the house is on a corner block. More cameras.

[Citroënbender]

Never mind the cameras, what a terrible way to butcher a ‘20s bungalow.

By the styling cues, I’m tipping the occupants are a Serbian couple in their seventies.

[roKWiz]

Where's the moat ?

Hideous, but nothing a D9 wouldn't fix.

[FairmontGS]

I bet most of them aren't even connected. Very odd.

[Tickford.]

I think the OP has DDS (Dan Derangement Syndrome)..

Here's a photo of the same intersection from 2007.. notice anything??







Covertly indeed! The OP's username says it all really.

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by Trendseeker

I think CCTV cameras in public places are a deterrent and improve safety. It doesn’t stop crime completely because the criminals overlook the presence of cameras that aren’t in obvious places.

You've nailed it there.

If CCTVs don't work, then lets remove them from airports, hospitals etc. And remove all red light and speed cameras.

I'll tell you what is a problem...dash cams and posting people who made minor errors on public websites and shaming.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

You've nailed it there.

If CCTVs don't work, then lets remove them from airports, hospitals etc. And remove all red light and speed cameras.

I'll tell you what is a problem...dash cams and posting people who made minor errors on public websites and shaming.

Scott's car cameras or whatever that youtube channel is The amount of minor crap they post is amazing.
"Oh look this car only slowed to 1km/h at a stop sign post it online. They must be shamed!!"

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Tickford.

I think the OP has DDS (Dan Derangement Syndrome)..

Here's a photo of the same intersection from 2007.. notice anything??


image

image


Covertly indeed! The OP's username says it all really.

A pole with an antenna and a street light behind it.
Get your eyes tested.

[AMB]

Cheaper than having police patrolling the streets, and it remembers everything. If anything happens they just go through the footage...cant stop em but you can get em after.

[wodahs]

Originally Posted by Officemanager

A pole with an antenna and a street light behind it.
Get your eyes tested.

i dont know !
a camera thats pretending to be an antenna would seem to be more covert to me

[roKWiz]

This thread has got me thinking of all the security that starting appearing in Sydney 30 years ago, with its street cameras, even older harbour bridge toll booth camera system, Darling Harbour precinct, the huge railway fencing off/camera program and hwy cameras along the lines of safety cam.
What happened back then in NSW seems to be filtering down to the other more sedate states.
Walking home yesterday, I was pondered the fact we don't even have fencing enclosing the railway lines here in country Victoria. Fences only start to appear on the outskirts of Melb.
Regularly live in both states, with ocassional cross into QLD.

[Trevor 57]

I am still to understand why this is a 'Dan' bashing thread when public surveillance CCTV is installed by local councils, traffic ones, yes, it is a Vicroads thing, which is a Government department, but the rest is just bull-****

I don't read people whinging about the camera's installed at the MCG? Yet many of you go to the AFL