I also think that to a certain extent we are talking past each other. I believe that most of that is due to myself being somewhat unclear.
As far as casinos (and other private properties) go, I have no problem with them using whatever type of camera and software they want provided they disclose the extent of the monitoring. For example, if they have cameras in the bathroom stalls, even though it is bad taste, as long as there are large warning signs mentioning that my voyage to the porcelain throne is being monitored, I don't have a problem with it. I can choose not to go.
Governements on the other hand, have resources and privelidges past putting cameras and monitors up in government owned buildings. Governments could put cameras up on phone polls and monitor areas that are not owned by anyone while I as an indvidual, even if I have the resources to do such, do not have the priviledge of being able to do so. In cases where equal potential does not exist, I think that information collecting should be severly limited.
I do agree that most of the restrictions should be on what companies actually do with the information that is being gathered. In my mind, the most important aspect of this is full disclosure. If a casino maps my face to my credit card and sells information about my individual spending habits, I believe that I have the right to know so that I may choose whether or not to frequent that casino based on how much I care about what that casino does with my personal information.
I also fully agree that harassment laws should be expanded. The local newspaper recently lost my business when they continued to call me at least once a week to ask if I wanted to subscribe when I was already a subscriber. Corporate stupidity, past a certain extent, ought to be both a civil and criminal offense.
[ Parent ]