Stop Whining About Privacy, Michael Bloomberg Says

[marmar]

Stop Whining About Privacy, Bloomberg Says
Posted on Mar 23, 2013


New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg thinks your concerns about privacy in a world of city- and drone-mounted surveillance cameras are unimportant. His advice to radio audiences Friday morning? “Get used to it!”

Bloomberg’s tough-guy, fatalistic attitude is well and fine for a man with $27 billion. He can buy all the privacy he wants. But you can’t. And he doesn’t care.

“You wait, in five years, the technology is getting better, ther’ll be cameras everyplace ... whether you like it or not,” Bloomberg said. ....................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/stop_whining_about_privacy_bloomberg_says_20130323/

[pipoman]

1. I just don't understand the undying love for this monster hereabouts..

[Egalitarian Thug]

66. There's a faction for whom nothing matters but the color of your jersey.

Austerity becomes an unfortunately necessity and Grandma will just have to buy the generic cat food.

[Demo_Chris]

89. well said

[graham4anything]

2. I agree with Bloomberg. Anyone who uses EZ pass and credit cards & the internet is already none

What his personal biz is is 100% irrelevant to any discussion.

And in five years, it will be Mayor Christine Quinn and the same thing will happen(or mayor anyone).

Why are people so paranoid?

Anyone who uses supermarket discount cards to get sales price is already known and tracked.

I use Charmin ultra with Aloe. Big whoops if anyone knows it or not. Wtf cares.

Besides, the person next to you with a cell phone is already taking pictures of you,
and any person who facebooks is an open book(but Zucky is your friend they think.)

If someone is not doing something wrong, what are they afraid of?

Are people such egotists to think that anyone cares about mundane things?

But when a child is kidnapped off the street, damn right I want cameras anywhere to pinpoint
quickly where the child is.

Sheesh, the WTC was in NYC(for those that didn't know that) and sure wish one had cameras everywhere to have stopped that.

[GoldenEagle16]

7. "If someone is not doing something wrong, what are they afraid of?"

sound like GW Bush justifying the Patriot Act.

Because we know that the government can be trusted to use their powers in a benevolent manner.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. Giving the police powers to gather information, (as opposed to to detain), mitigates that.

The better the information the police have, the less likely innocent people are to be arrested.

[GoldenEagle16]

14. So I should give up all privacy into order to avoid being falsely accused and arrested?

How about we demand the police do their job in a professional manner and not arrest people until they have adequate evidence?

[hobbit709]

15. My response to that one.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

55. x1000

[graham4anything]

77. Yup. Rodney King, innocent man would have not had justice had there been no cameras

[beevul]

84. If they had been police cameras, we very well may never have seen the king video.

It may have been erased, or "malfunctioned" or been "inadvertently switched off", as is seen far too often.

Have you noticed how often the little people are told by the police they can't video the police? You approve, I'm sure.

You really appear to worship mayor 1 percent stop and frisk, and his authoritarianistic policies.

[premium]

19. Yeah, right.

I'm laughing so hard I can't catch my breath.

[marmar]

8. ^ This is probably the least surprising response in the thread.

'Sheesh, the WTC was in NYC(for those that didn't know that) and sure wish one had cameras everywhere to have stopped that.'

And you think CAMERAS would have prevented that? ...... Perhaps decades of a different policy in the Middle East would have, n'est-ce pas?

[graham4anything]

12. I don't trust Zimmerman and his cellphone or gun. I don't trust a kidnapper or perv.

I would trust the city

Wouldn't want Zimmerman and his cell phone.


Guess transparency is just for the other person,

BTW, if cameras were all over Florida, one could have seen Zimmy shooting an unarmed kid
coward style.

Cameras could have caught Timid McV. before he did it.
Cameras could have caught the killer of kind, meek Dr. Tiller
Cameras could have caught Oswald and Ray and SS (or whomever you believe)

A camera in Elvis's bathroom might just have been able to revive him and knock some sense into him instead of his needless death.

Why is every ounce of wellness rebuked.
Reminds me of the old joke about the drowning man and someone throwing him a lifejacket, rope and helicopter. While he refused and waited for God to save him.

[premium]

16. Geeez, what's next?

Checkpoints at every state's borders? National stop and frisk? That's one ole Bloomie would love to see.
Cameras in every bathroom, bedroom, garage?
Where do you draw the line on govt. intrusion?
Do you even believe in personal privacy?

[hobbit709]

17. That poster is fine with the provisions of the Enabling Act of 2001

[graham4anything]

20. Bush took the helicopter out of town. He is so yesterday. Don't like Bush? Don't elect Jeb.

The WTC fell.
I am a New Yorker.
And 100% of all the firemen and police who died were union workers.

[hobbit709]

27. Is it now? The last time I looked our version of the Sicherheitsdienst was still in operation.

And your last statement has nothing to do with this discussion. As far as that goes neither does the one about Jeb.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

51. The firemen and police are who the public is told to think about....

What really upset the power elite was the lawyers, bankers, brokers and traders.

BTW: Don't you find it funny how the yokels rail about a One World Government under the UN but they get all weepy looking at the Twin Towers which were all about a One World Economy under the WTO?

[premium]

22. What saddens me the most is that

he's dead ass serious about how wonderful govt. intrusion is.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

79. What I like the most is that he has absolutely no power to do anything. He simply wants

to ride on the coattails of Bloomberg.

Next week, for what it's worth, he'll meaninglessly endorse the actions and policies of some other authority figure.

[randome]

21. Where do you draw the line?

None of this even approaches putting cameras in bedrooms! The conversation is about public places.

[premium]

23. Did you even read his post?

He would have been fine with a camera in Elvis's bathroom.
He's said before that he would be ok with checkpoints at state's borders.
He's been ok with Bloomie's stop and frisk policy.

[randome]

29. I don't see anything about Elvis in the article. Am I missing it?

I still think saying that cameras will be posted in your bedroom is ridiculous.

On edit: Whoops. You were talking about graham4anything's post, not the article. My mistake. Yeah, that's a ridiculous piece of over-reach, too. I don't even know what he means by that.

But as far as monitoring in public is concerned, that doesn't bother me at all.

[graham4anything]

33. I was making an analogy to the conspiracy theorists who think Elvis still exists

which is about as rational as all the other antiObama conspiracy theories.

People who don't want any form of anything being done about guns hate Bloomberg.
So anything that mentions his name will be formulated by their opinion on guns.

Bloomberg didn't put cameras in nor will in Jan. the next mayor not put cameras in.

He is just a vessel for the pro-NRA/pro-Gun people to hate.

Who are they going to use as a scapegoat in Jan. when there is a new mayor?

Maybe they all want Giulaini and the race riots back that Rudy gave us.

[randome]

47. Yeah, Bloomberg just expressed an opinion, which he's entitled to.

[oneshooter]

71. " Elvis didn't die, he just went home."

[premium]

35. Right here.

www.democraticunderground.com/10022558773#post12

A camera in Elvis's bathroom might just have been able to revive him and knock some sense into him instead of his needless death.

Maybe I'm old school, but I remember when there where no cameras watching your every move in public.
It bugs me to see that we, as a society, are willing to see more and more of our rights being chipped away in the name of security.

[graham4anything]

42. There are 100% foolproof methods to never have another movie theatre again

It bugs me that 20 little kiddies were killed in school
it bugs me that an asssasssin took Dr. Tiller and MLK and RFK and JFK and that
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE could have been prevented were it not for a gun and a bullet

And it bugs me that Elvis had zero friends with the guts to put him on a wellness program so he could have died of old age instead of by the sucide life style he had.

Bugs me that every ounce of wellness is rebuked

Bugs me that people don't listen to Ben Franklin who said
"an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"

It bugs me that the NRA with its 1% members, talks for 99% of the country.

So, lots of things bug me including the fact that Bloomberg is a vessel for hatred from the NRA, who of course hates that their blackmailing days are coming to an end, as are guns and bullets in the streets, though thousands and thousands more will die til it happens.

That bugs me



anyone on facebook has LESS privacy than anyone on a NYC street.

[premium]

44. You're entitled to be bugged,

just as we're entitled to repudiate your precious 1% Bloomberg for his authoritarian policies and those that agree with him.

[randome]

48. 'Old school' doesn't mean you can't acknowledge how technology has changed us forever.

Monitoring is so easy to do, which is why it's being deployed more and not because someone woke up one day and decided to start doing it.

Just as the industrial revolution made it easy to manufacture things, subsequently more things were manufactured.

It's a new fact of life and has nothing, IMO, to do with one's adherence to a previous way of life.

[premium]

49. We'll just have to disagree with each other.

I think that the expanded surveillance is a bad thing that will eventually lead to bad consequences.

[randome]

50. And you could be right, of course.

[graham4anything]

59. If there were cameras AND today's net back in 2000 in miami dade country courthouse

the weasels from Tom DeLays texas would have been outed immediately, the recount gone on and 9-11 and the patriot act never happened

If there were camaeras in NYC in the mid70s, Son of Sam would have been caught instantly
instead of a year of terrorism

[premium]

63. You can tout this all you want,

but it's still more govt. surveillance over the people and you seem to have no problem with it, well, I do and I will keep on fighting and speaking out against it.

[graham4anything]

64. and eventually will have to give an actual reason not to be for it

Being that only people in NYC are affected by it, someone in a small town (where for decades ones telephones were like those on Green Acres and everybody could have listened in) is not affected by this.

So why the beef?

It's quite simple if one doesn't like rules in NYC, don't go to NYC

there is a choice not to go there.

[premium]

67. You think that stepped up surveillance is a NYC thing?

Are you living in a bubble in NYC? This is nationwide, and as far as I concerned, it's govt. wanting to control it's citizens via surveillance.
Believe me, I have zero desire to ever travel to NYC, the further I stay away from there, the better off I am.

[graham4anything]

68. Then you should have no concern about The Great Equalizer, Mike.

He is not going to be in office after January 2013.

So he is of no concern to anyone (except NRA folk).

And hopefully he will become the new owner of the NY Times.
Bloomberg news is already the left answer to Murdoch's group.

[premium]

69. My concern is that Mike is nothing more than an authoritarian dickwad

who would love to implement his bullshit policies nationwide once he's out of office and he has the money to buy politicians to do just that.

[sarisataka]

24. To save you the head ache

Checkpoints at every state's borders? National stop and frisk?

the poster has already spoken in favor of both...

[graham4anything]

30. California keeps out deadly produce. I wannt also keep out guns/bullets like Calif. does for food

California already has checkpoints to keep other states produce out.
Deadly produce kills.
Guns and bullets kill

so stop the distortion.

Cameras in the street are not cameras in your bedroom.

as Kristofferson sang "freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose"
One can be totally free, then wail at the moon on the beach for everyone that person lost in their quest for their own personal freedom.

The people killed by terrorists, or pervs or random, have ZERO freedom. Possibly a camera on the streets would have saved them.

And to be fair, are you saying that one should not have any form of security in their house or car, because that is an intrusion of privacy?

[sarisataka]

72. Where did i mention guns and bullets?

I am a big fan of the entire BoR. This is a issue with the 4th.

[graham4anything]

88. I stop at the declaration,where Thomas Jefferson said all are equal, whoops, he didn't say that.

Jefferson forgot 72% of the democratic party in his words, he specifically endorsed and agreed with.
All who looked and acted like Jefferson is what Jefferson, a vile man who owned slaves said.

I am most certainly not one of those absolutists. There is no 2nd Amendment right for Zimmerman to do what he did.

[sarisataka]

93. At least TJ had the beliefs of the majority

of his time to support his opinions. I would think if Mr. Jefferson lived in these more enlightened times he would had expanded his views.
What is Big Bloomberg's excuse for the racial targeting of stop and frisk?


Not sure what absolutists you refer to... I don't know who says the 2A allows you to shoot people randomly; it speaks to keep and bear, use is restricted by other law.

[cherokeeprogressive]

82. California checkpoints are fucking CLOSED when it rains. Produce AND immigration.

Jesus.

[Phillip McCleod]

58. that's fine you're welcome to trust them and let them record you everywhere..

..meanwhile i'm going on a destructive rampage in which i steal every security camera i can lay my hands on and then sell it on E-bay.

i promise to donate part of the proceeds to a good charity. maybe the EFF.

[Smarmie Doofus]

41. Keeping the ME in a state of perpetual war is good $$$$-ly for the people who want...

.... the citizenry here under perpetual and complete surveilance.

[Union Scribe]

92. Indeed.

Don't say anything bad about right winger St. Mikey!

[hobbit709]

13. It figures.

[Smarmie Doofus]

37. Oh.... Jesus. That's what Cardinal Spellman said during the McCarthy era. Verbatim.

>>>>>If someone is not doing something wrong, what are they afraid of? >>>>>>>>>

YOU, for one.

And *Bloomberg*.

And Gates, Koch, Murdoch, Walmart, et al et al et al.

No offense.. but how old are you?

"Paranoid."

Read "J.Edgar Hoover --- The Man and Secrets" by Curt Gentry.

"Paranoid."

Riiiigggghtt.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

53. You better watch out....

...you better not cry,
better not pout I'm tellin' you why,
Micheal Bloomberg's watching the town.
He's making a list and checking it twice
Gonna find out who's naughty or nice.
Micheal Bloomberg's watching the town.
He sees you when you're sleeping
He knows when you're awake
He knows when you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake!

[Art_from_Ark]

91. Ha ha ha ha

He knows when you've been serving
A super sized sweet drink
So you better make it two pint-size drinks
Or you might go to the clink

[Phillip McCleod]

57. right because security cameras would have stopped WTC bombing..

WTF?!? that's the most patently idiotic bullshit i've read all morning and it's been a *bad* morning.

[Dragonfli]

73. Graham cracker is a hoot! He posts weirder stuff by the hour. I swear some artist

somewhere created him as an interactive installation, think performance art, using absurdity to entertain us.

The guy can't possibly be real!

[RZM]

74. Most entertaining poster I've seen here

Ever.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

80. Be patient. He'll try to top himself. But he's so far out, it may take a day or two.

[idwiyo]

76. "First they came for the rich..." Why I am not surprised next one is "if someone is not doing

something wrong, what are they afraid of?"

[ZOB]

87. Your post makes my skin crawl

To suggest that it's no big deal when the government invades our privacy is bad enough.

To further suggest that it's egotistical to question said surveillance is just so Orwellian that I'm beyond words.

[99Forever]

3. In a way...

.. as much disgust as I have for 1%er assholes like this authoritarian dickhead, he's actually correct. Short of a People's Revolution to stop it, it will be the not-at-all-distant future. You will be monitored in all you do and if you don't comply with what The Corporate Owners dictate, you will find yourself in a world of hurt. It's already begun.

[MH1]

4. True story:

yesterday I was doing some environmental maintenance with a few other community members. Someone told a sad story of where (in another community) some trees and shrubs had been planted as part of a riparian buffer, but "neighbor kids" (allegedly - it is someone, right?) were coming and ripping the plants out.

My response: that's what cameras are for. Find out which kids, and fine the parents. A lot of money and effort went into those plantings, and they have an important purpose. If someone's coming along and destroying it, that's bullshit.

Cameras have their uses.

I don't really give a shit about whether cameras are watching me when I'm in public spaces. I work downtown and take transit. I was happy to see cameras going up in many of the subway trains (even surmising, as fast as they appeared, that most of the little boxes must be dummies, and only a few live - the crooks can't tell which are live). If someone attacks me, if there is a live surveillance camera, the cops are much more likely to catch the crook.

YMMV.


ETA: and I don't have $27B, just a working, commuting person who wants to be safe going about my business.

[randome]

9. I agree with your point of view.

Most of those who see this kind of stuff as 'end-of-the-world' authoritarianism, IMO, watch too many dystopian sci-fi movies.

In a public place, I, too, couldn't care less who sees me anymore than I care whose glance happens to alight on me as I walk past.

[pintobean]

5. Screw Mayor 0.000002 percenter. nt

[treestar]

6. He has a kind of point in that

If you are out and about in NYC, you have no privacy anyway.

[markiv]

11. facebook's creator's quotes on privacy has kept me off it

he might not believe in privacy, but i do

[Brigid]

18. Zuckerberg's remarks about privacy . . .

Are one big reason why I stay away from FaceBook. I just find it creepy.

[markiv]

34. i fail to understand why others dont find it creepy

and also fail to notice that an organization with big expenses and no user fees is worth so many billions

it all adds up, for anyone who cares to press the total button

[Brigid]

39. We're all for sale, whether we want to be or not.

[markiv]

43. but we dont have to help them do it

which facebook 100 percent does

[MineralMan]

25. And, on the other side of that coin,

we had a case here in the Twin Cities a couple of years ago. A shopkeeper at a small grocery store in Minneapolis was brutally gunned down by robbers. Security cameras in the store captured the entire event. Very quickly, the murderers were identified and arrested.

Almost every time the local TV news shows security camera videos of a crime, the perpetrator ends up being caught fairly quickly. The thing is that bad guys are not nice people, and someone they've treated badly will see the video and drop a dime on the creep.

This is true of cameras in public areas, too. Yes, they see you, too, but they are a great aid in identifying and capturing violent criminals. Somehow, they don't alarm me that much.

[greytdemocrat]

26. Bloomberg...

Can take his money and opinions and shove them.

I don't need to be subjected to another self righteous prick like him.
Run your city and STFU.

In MHO of course...

[randome]

31. I think those who are maimed or brutalized or lose loved ones due to violence would disagree.

[randome]

46. Cameras in public places does not equate to a police state, IMO.

A police state is when people are 'disappeared', for instance. And with the prevalence of the Internet, where anyone can get access to just about any sort of information, I think this makes it less likely that a police state will develop.

[Phillip McCleod]

61. no just a 'surveillance state'

like 'We' by zamyatin.. not '1984' or 'brave new world'.

'we' live in apartments with glass walls and ceilings. 'guardian angels' (police) follow us everywhere, breathing down our necks at every moment, but we ignore them because we are trained to ignore them. it's as if they are invisible, though they follow us everywhere we pretend they do not.

..

is no less a nightmare dystopia.

[Pisces]

32. Privacy is an illusion. Our phone calls, whereabouts can all be monitored now without our consent.

Everyone with a camera phone can take your photo without your permission and this can be used to log your whereabouts
when posted to facebook or instagram etc.

[woo me with science]

38. I see the corporate messages got here quickly.

Naw, Americans don't care about privacy!

You must be aberrant, or something.

[snot]

40. The equations are simple and have been proved through centuries of experience:

Power corrupts.
Knowledge is power.
A balance of power requires a balance of knowledge.
Allowing an imbalance of power to persist is an invitation to abuse.

We are foolish to allow the powerful access to any more information about us than we have about them.

[premium]

45. I love this saying:

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[snot]

94. Agreed!

[whatchamacallit]

52. I, for one, welcome our new dystopic watchers!

Fuck Bloomberg.

[Phillip McCleod]

54. fine. we will stop whining about it, mr. mayor..

..and start *doing* something about it.

like property damage and theft on a massive scale as we tear down the surveillance state one camera at a time. those things can bring anywhere from $50-$200 or more on E-Bay.

yes, i'm absolutely advocating massive property destruction and theft of video cameras. don't forget your balaclava.

here's a how-to in case you think i'm making this up.. definitely *not* my idea to start with..

http://www.schnews.org.uk/diyguide/guidetoclosedcircuittelevisioncctvdestruction.htm

[AnotherMcIntosh]

81. Very amusing.

[jmg257]

56. Why doesn't Bloomberg just adopt us all, and pay us a weekly allowance to behave?

Then he can dictate all he wants.

[premium]

60. Bloomberg reminds me of this guy.

The benevolent Cocktoo from the movie, Demolition Man.

[abelenkpe]

62. There are cameras in your phone, your laptop, your television,

In every parking lot, almost every store. There are thousands of cookies and deamons running on your computer from the various sites you visit and comment on collecting data on your purchases, likes and opinions so that corporations can target their ads to suit you. That information is collected and sold over and over and over without your knowledge or benefit. Game companies and software companies force you to accept long contracts no one reads that install spyware on your computer in order to use the product you purchased on your own machine. But damn, a camera on the street used to give tickets to people driving through a red light or in an area of high crime? Can't have that. So what if traffic lights alleviate traffic and pedestrian accidents. So what if crimes like selling drugs and burglary go down. (Studies show it doesnt help violent crime though, because those tend to be crimes of passion) So what if those cameras help solve crimes so that there is justice for the victims? If the government is collecting that information we get outraged and suspect all kinds of nefarious things are being done with that information. Why are we not equally outraged about how corporations are already digging into our private lives and selling that information? Bloomberg may be a puffed up billionaire ass but he has a point in that it makes no sense to deny government the use of the same information every one else already has their hands on. How are we supposed to go back to the world where this information isn't so readily available. Remember government is (supposed to be) us.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

65. "ther’ll be cameras everyplace"? Including cameras to spy upon the banksters in their offices?

Not a chance.

The 0.000000000000000001 % like Bloomberg want to spy upon the rest of us, and certainly don't want it to be the other way around.

[SammyWinstonJack]

70. $27 billion and his own private army, as he puts it....the NYPD.

[Raine]

75. Give your privacy away Bloomberg if you choose but you have no right

take it from the public.

[Thinkingabout]

78. There are a lot of cameras already in use, I have them around my home.

Several crimes have a timeline which are recorded and arrest have followed. Its kinda like DNA, if you don't want to do the time maybe you should not do the crime. I think the UK has lots of surveillance set up and devices which will alert them to someone on a wanted list.

[graham4anything]

90. Yup. Great point about DNA.

People love DNA testing, very good point.

[Rex]

85. SO the king of NYC wants the serfs to shush it?

Careful outside with a Big Gulp! His Excellency might be on the end of a street cam getting your ID! Come out personally and swat that drink right out of your hand(s)!!!

I guess it really does take billions to rule over sugar addicted workers/drones/warriors. I wonder if he views people as ants?

[HiPointDem]

86. what would you expect from a guy who buys legislators so he can have an extra term? dictator

bloomberg.