NAOMI BROCKWELL: Surveillance has dangerous psychological consequences -- yet we're creating a world without privacy. We aren't passive enjoyers of tech, we have say in its direction. Let's write a better future.

People become defensive instead of open-minded.  Admitting to a change in our beliefs might seem like a weakness in the face of ever-present digital history.  And knowing that our actions are constantly monitored and recorded can make us refrain from exploring new ideas, or questioning the status quo because we fear the potential repercussions or judgment based on our digital trail with every digital action being scrutinized, there's a subtle push toward conformity.  It becomes safer to follow the herd than to stand out or challenge prevailing norms and this leads to a society that values uniformity of individual thought.  This new-found digital shadow haunts us.  Instead of spontaneous expressions or genuine searches for knowledge, we might lean toward actions that look better in our digital profile.  There is this subtle internalization that our digital self is in some way more important than our real self.  In a world like this, open authenticity becomes scarce, replaced by curated personalities for digital consumption.  These are profound shifts in the collective psyche of society that we need to be aware of . . . .  --Naomi Brockwell

Privacy is a vaunted goal to get after.  But surveillance is so far developed that it is hard to imagine privacy winning.  

In our communities, police forces in squad cars have receded in favor of crowd-sourced surveillance.

.@naomibrockwell says, "privacy is fundamental to a free society.”

She lists some of the many ways that my privacy is being violated.

She persuades me to delete some of the apps on my phone: pic.twitter.com/a8a52WQgcj

— John Stossel (@JohnStossel) September 18, 2024

Pervasive surveillance has 2 major effects on society:
- It puts freedom at risk (10:43)
- It has deep psychological impacts (18:52)

We need to be very careful not to normalize constant surveillance.
Instead let's make sure we're writing the best possible future. pic.twitter.com/0H8aBOJ8QL

— Naomi Brockwell priv/acc (@naomibrockwell) March 24, 2024

"Crowd-Sourced Suspicion Apps Are Out of Control," Matthew Guariglia, Electronic Frontier Foundation, October 21, 2021.

"Community Surveillance Apps,"

"Networked Self-Defense and Monetized Vigilantism: Private Surveillance Systems," Elizabeth E. Joh, SSRN, July 26, 2021.  

"The Rise of Fear-Based Social Media Like Nextdoor, Citizen, and Now Amazon's Neighbors," Rani Molla, May 7, 2019.

"Breaking the Limits in Urban Video Monitoring: Massive Crowd Source Surveillance Over Vehicles," Vitaly Petrov; Sergey Andreev; Mario Gerla; Yevgeni Koucheryavy, IEEE Wireless Communications, September 23, 2018.

Crowdsourced Surveillanced and Networked Data, Nick Lally, Security Dialogue, SAGE, February 2017.

"The Real Monster of Street Level Surveillance," Rory Mir, Electronic Frontier Foundation, October 25, 2024.

disciplinary mechanisms [that] shap[e] individuals into economically productive, but politically impotent, entities

Foucault distinguishes three chief disciplinary mechanisms, all of which contribute to shaping individuals into economically productive, but politically impotent, entities – if this sounds familiar, given the apathy of most citizens in contemporary democracies, it should be clear what the history behind present levels of political passivity, if not impotence, has been.       --Bert Olivier

What contemporary city-denizens take for granted was not always the case, and most people would be surprised to know that #surveillance has a long history, and was linked to modes of punishment from early on.   https://t.co/GnshPQCt5P

— Activist Post (@ActivistPost) December 11, 2023

Here is Bert Olivier's review of Foucault's punishment and prison.  

Foucault distinguishes three chief disciplinary mechanisms, all of which contribute to shaping individuals into economically productive, but politically impotent, entities – if this sounds familiar, given the apathy of most citizens in contemporary democracies, it should be clear what the history behind present levels of political passivity, if not impotence, has been. These mechanisms are ‘hierarchical observation,’ ‘normalizing judgment,’ and the ‘examination’ (in which the first two are combined). Together, they comprise the backbone of a ‘panoptical’ society, named after Bentham’s optimal-surveillance prison, or ‘Panopticon.’ Such ‘panopticism,’

. . .  

Foucault demonstrates in this book, has become pervasive in modern society through the micro-operation of mechanisms such as those alluded to above. In passing one should note that modern panopticism – guided by the regulative ideal of complete transparency or visibility of all citizens – could be understood as a secular version of the Christian (as well as other religions’) belief that no one can escape the ‘all-seeing eye of God.’

Instead, modern control requires many, varied micro-mechanisms for disciplining citizens, such as ‘the gentle way of punishment’ – prison incarceration, which was put into practice surprisingly quickly, with its meticulously calculated categories of morally efficient and socially useful penalties, as a generalized punishment for a diversity of crimes in the late 18^th and early 19^th centuries in Europe (Foucault 1995, pp. 115-117). It also included the ‘instrumental coding of the body,’ for example the discipline of rifle training (Foucault 1995, p. 153), as well as the ‘analytic’ of learning to read according to different stages (Foucault 1995, pp. 159-160), teaching children a form of uniform ‘penmanship’ (Foucault 1995, p. 176), and organizing available space in hospitals in an increasingly ‘efficient’ manner.

Other kinds of hierarchical observation – with its connotation of higher versus lower – marked by its accompanying effect of control, by turning people into docile bodies, are not hard to find. Teachers and lecturers are familiar with the sloping way in which rows of seating are arranged in schools and universities, where optimally lit classrooms and lecture halls with large windows facilitate the visibility and learning of, as well as discipline among students. Counterparts of this may readily be found in factories and hospitals.

This reminds me how student behavior is already formed by the time they are in middle and high school.  And it is the height of a teacher's hubris to think that the kids' behavior is the way it is because of them.