In recent days there was much talk of the new measure taken by the Privacy Authority in respect of surveillance, with which the Authority has decided to update the old rules (dating back to 2004).
E 'can refer to the online full text of the measure and the handbook prepared by the Guarantor, and the network can already read many comments (we mark the one friend Stephen LaGuardia, found here ).
(By Daniel Pink )
In the coming months we will definitely go back to the topic, since businesses, organizations and their advisers will need to prepare for the necessary adaptation to the new provisions. What strikes the eye right now is that the issue now seems to affect only the insiders, but not citizens.
The questions I ask are: If someone is still at dozens of cameras that follow him in every move? Or have we already passed the "threshold of tolerance" for which the presence of hundreds of electronic eyes do not offend anyone? I was the only one to think that the price we are paying for a false security is too high in terms of sacrifice of individual liberties and behavioral change?
[...] This post was Mentioned on Twitter by Ernesto Belisario. Ernesto Belisario said: New blog post: And they lived happy, content and video surveillance ... http://bit.ly/9cz8iL [...]
Even I do not like the superfluous of "digital eyes". I think it is a great injury to the right to privacy of their privacy, not balanced enough so no need for security. Dear Ernesto, do not worry, your opinion is not isolated and I would add for good luck.
A hug and congratulations on the issues addressed by the blog!
You are not alone in thinking that we are too guarded and especially that this affects much more than our direct to privacy when it does not increase security.