I think on HN we might all agree that type of scrutiny is racist and pointless.
If the Aaron Swartz story were not about a white person using the MIT network but instead about a black person using any other network, no one would have cared. Additionally, if he were black, there's a decent chance he would have died the day he ran from authorities.
You would think, but every time this happens on HN there is usually at least one reaction of disbelief that someone really gets worse treatment because of the color of their skin.
Do you think that security forces would be less able to violate your rights if all interactions with them recorded? Alternatively, do you think video logs of interactions with oppressive security forces might spark public outrage in a way that mere eyewitness testimony would not?
If they do, and get away with it, then we have a deeper problem.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-suprem...
Video is becoming mightier than violence.
(Black male American citizen here). Yes, that was pretty much the the reaction I had (you can look at some of my posts in the Swartz submissions). I've spend most of my adolescent, teenage and adult life being subject to extra scrutiny by police and private security, presumably due to the combination of my gender and skin color ("presumably" since I didn't do anything wrong) and whenever I point this out on various geek/tech sites like Reddit or Slashdot, posters respond that this scrutiny is justified. Welcome to my world.
The other interesting thing I notices is that in response to all the various privacy intrusions that may be possible with Google Glass (and Google's possibly futile attempts to limit these uses but banning facial recognition apps and requiring the camera light to be on when recording) the techie response is basically "resistance is futile, technology will find a way, get used to it." The PRISM program is an example of the same thing - technology will find a way. The obvious difference is that in one example it's corporations or private individuals creating the violations while in the other it's the government, but in terms of the disruptive effects it can have on my life (and my recourse in light of those effects) to me it's a distinction without a difference.
This is the brave new world for some of you. Get used to it.
(btw, has Stallman spoken publically about Glass?)