Travis wrote: > Why not just go with the easy solutions? * Destroying a (legally emplaced) camera would be considered a crime (or at least a misdemeanor, if the system has concepts like 'petty' and 'grand' vandalism along the lines of 'grand theft'). It is the principle that matters, not the amount. A legal system might be overwhelmed by the caseload, but that might not stop them from setting a few examples ...
* Recording others without their consent might be considered a violation of their civil rights (or their IP rights of their own likeness). Again the numbers might limit countermeasures, but owners of illegal cameras have to fear that someone will bring a lawsuit just against them, or class action suits. Surveillance may still be possible, but anybody with big money has to weigh the risk of being targeted by a lawsuit. * A legal system might ban gadgets which are used only/mostly for illegal purposes, similar to radar speed trap detectors today. * Operators of shopping malls, apartment buildings, and gated communities may require all visitors/customers to sign away their privacy rights. The only safe places would be houses fully owned by the tenants and (ironically) government offices. * Countermeasures against microscopic/nanoscale surveillance could be other micro/nano gadgets, fighting an ongoing war in the atmosphere. There is a scene like that in Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age. * Hackers could target the data transmission, inserting false data packets into broadcasts from 'surveillance dust'. _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
