Most cameras in the UK (I think around 95% even) are private.

Not sure why you think the UK is an authoritarian regime. Check any ranking and it is one of the freest countries out there (Heritage Ranking, for example: https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking)

Yet the UK has the Snooper's Charter, GCHQ and mass content policing. This is new bill is an extension of their control apparatus, not an exceptionally unique case.

They will become increasingly networked via services like Amazon Ring and it may as well be a government surveillance network.

He is referring to the camera network in London.

The government's camera network in London is very small, only 23708 cameras (15516 of which are from Transport of London across the tube network)[0].

It's a fairly small network for an authoritarian government.

[0]https://www.cctv.co.uk/how-many-cctv-cameras-are-there-in-lo....

In what way is that a "very small" network?

In fact, given how small London is that's a huge network.

Small London?

London's population: 8.982 million

Area: 8,382 km2.

How is that small?

Oh this is going to be fun.

I see you're referring to the "Metro area of London". when referring to that size. The size of London proper is 1,572 km2 (Wikipedia, as well)

So now, the fun question is "what area is the camera count referring to?"

Further, the quantity of cameras matters less than the areas the cameras can see that is covered.

Even further-further is how easy it is for the government to acquire the footage off those cameras.

> lots of humans that have any political pull at all tend to be authoritarian

I think it's probably more like a survivorship bias than an innate quality. The only people who are capable of surviving in politics long enough to the point where they have any meaningful influence are the ones who know how to use the systems under their control to protect themselves while tearing down their opponents. Usually this means attempting to consolidate power in themselves, ie. authoritarianism.

Oh, I also mean regular people. The loudest voice sing songs and get articles written ... about new laws we need to add (when the old laws already cover the illegal misdeeds) to stop a new threat from coming upon us, perceived or otherwise.

edit: or making laws that are more about making it illegal to do something some people find icky or culturally unusual.

If your definition of authoritarianism is ubiquitous video surveillance you'll have to come to terms with the fact that not only every politician is authoritarian but just about every citizen, because there's pretty strong support for these security measures.

The word authoritarianism appears to have lost all meaning in internet circles. What authoritarianism actually is, is a people being governed without their consent by a government they did not elect. If British citizens, or their representatives decide they put significant value on public safety rather than privacy that's a choice.

I'm speaking of Authoritarianism in the way that the Political Compass refers to it: https://www.politicalcompass.org/