> I do not accept your aguement
> because it does not directly attack the issue at hand, which is cameras in
> public.
Actually, it is part and parcel of the same thing, Raymond -- especially
when you add Features Mapping and Recognition software to the mix. There is
a big difference between a human police officer trying to identify a
specific person directly from a video tape, and that same officer relying on
"authorative" software that claims it has in deed identified a specific
person. You know human nature: if a machine said it (television, polygraph,
etc.), then we tend to believe it before any other evidence is in. Like my
statement regarding refusal of DNA sampling -- and as backed up by Eric with
a concrete example -- this is a slippery slope with real world damages right
around the corner. That is rather dangerous.
> Heck, you could say cops _in general_ lead to abuse, but that
> wouldn't be a good argument, would it?
No, I would never make such a statement.
> Don't tell me, "This policy is bad
> because it could lead to ..."
>
Of course I will say that, Raymond. A policy _is_ bad if it will lead our
society (or any one of its individuals) in the wrong direction, or place us
on a slippery slope. These are the very judgments that we as thinking
citizens must make before such policies are allowed under the law. Perhaps
I understood your statement incorrectly? Please correct me where I might
have misinterpreted.
> As a society, we have said that we do not allow for _absolute_ personal
> freedom. If we did, murder would be acceptable. So, we do have to accept
> compromises in order to live in safety.
The only valid compromise is this: that we not be allowed under the law to
deprive another person of his Constitutional Rights by force or fraud. That
compromise leaves quite a lot of breathing room for a just society with
reasonable safety and the preservation of individual rights.
I really appreciate your take on things, Raymond, and I enjoy the
discussion.
Respectfully,
Adam Phillip Churvis
Advanced Certified ColdFusion Developer
Productivity Enhancement, Inc.
Want truly advanced database training? Register for Database Development
with SQL Server, Oracle, and ColdFusion 5 at
http://www.ColdFusionTraining.com!
http://www.CommerceBlocks.com
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 770-446-8866
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
