What Happens When the Surveillance State Becomes an Affordable Gadget?

Re:What Happens When the Surveillance State Becomes an Affor... by pdkl95 on Sunday March 13, 2016 @12:27PM (#11278205)

As Dan Geer warned[1], technology changed the balance of powers when the cost tends towards zero:

    The central dynamic internal to government is, and always
    has been, that the only way for either the Executive or the Legislature
    to control the many sub-units of government is by way of how much
    money they can hand out.
    ...
    Suppose, however, that surveillance becomes too cheap to meter,
    that is to say too cheap to limit through budgetary processes.  Does
    that lessen the power of the Legislature more, or the power of the
    Executive more?  I think that ever-cheaper surveillance substantially
    changes the balance of power in favor of the Executive and away
    from the Legislature. While President Obama was referring to
    something else when he said "I've Got A Pen And I've Got A Phone,"
    he was speaking to exactly this idea -- things that need no
    appropriations are outside the system of checks and balances.

The "power of the purse" doesn't mean much when technology drives prices towards zero.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT-TGvYOBpI#t=625 http://geer.tinho.net/geer.blackhat.6viii14.txt

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What Happens When the Surveillance State Becomes an Affor... by digi_owl on Sunday March 13, 2016 @01:07PM (#11278387)

While a bit banal in this regard, it bring to mind the notion i have had that copyright was not strongly enforced previously in part because it would necessitate a cop in every home.

Now however there is at least one cop in every home, or at the very least a snitch. This thanks to internet connected computing devices.

[ Parent | on HN ]