Hacker News Reader

> Minority Report is not a dystopian vision: it's a blueprint for a more just society.

Yeah arresting people for crimes they have yet to commit doesn't sound more just to me.

> Crime thrives in dark corners. A surveillance society is a searing searchlight to expose and eradicate the the rot.

Crime thrives when people have no other options. Providing economic opportunities for everyone reduces crime far more than mass surveillance ever will.

The entire moral quandary behind minority report could be avoided simply by having police monitor people, and if they are actually about to commit murder---prevent it and arrest them for attempted murder.

The reason they didn't do that was simply because it's a movie, and movies work better if instead of picking a compromise point between our society and some future ideal---you just pick the future ideal that will seem crazy to people.

It's like Logan's Run (movie) where the issue isn't just that you kill everyone over 30 to save resources, but that you lie and pretend no one can physically live past 30 and everyone gets reincarnated. They inserted the moral quandary to make the story interesting.

If the only moral quandary you see with Minority Report is that they do the arrests before the crimes happen then I sincerely hope you're never in a position to guide public policy on anything really.

Is this missing a /s? If every single piece of data related to you is stored and accessible by the government then it only takes a change in the political winds to turn you from a model citizen to an enemy of the state. You even reference Minority Report where half of the movie was the main character being framed for a crime.

Beyond that, if we really did want to make wide spread data collection a part of society it should be a constitutional change in the US at least. The 4th amendment protects against unreasonable searches. Proposing that everyone gets searched all the time is just a way for the government to weasel their way around that restriction. Doing so just degrades the rule of law which has a host of problems.

The only way I could possibly see being ok with everyones information being available all the time is if warrants were for specific information, for example looking for people who bought pressure cookers before the boston bombing, and any evidence found in this dragnet that pointed to other crimes could _never_ be used in any other case. That would at least prevent fishing expeditions from the government

> It's not technologically, politically or legally feasible to expect that anything you do on the internet can or should be kept from the authorities

Which authorities? Just because you are comfortable with the authorities there where you are or the authorities you have today, doesn't mean you should be comfortable with the authorities here or the authorities you may have tomorrow

> we can end anti-social behaviour as we know it and achieve the kind of peace and harmony that only come from full accountability

Who is we? Who is going to read, interpret and correctly act on this information? Only a total boot heal would write something like this. Your faith in authority is misplaced.

> Crime thrives in dark corners. A surveillance society is a searing searchlight to expose and eradicate the the rot.

You know what else thrives in dark corners? Dissent. A searchlight can wilt a flower just as much as it can expose rot

> Legitimate buyers have nothing to fear and terrorists get caught

There are exactly two people that want to blow up a marathon with a pressure cooker bomb. Two. The planet was only able to produce 22 people who want to fly planes into buildings in over 80 years of commercial aviation. Even then, that was only possible because of an anomaly of state sponsorship. Terrorism is such a tiny problem as to not even deserve mention.

"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."

- Edward Snowden

Sorry, it's early in the morning and my sarcasm detector isn't working properly yet. Are you being serious?

Either a troll or a shill.

Repeat after me:

"I can't wait to be judged by a panel with a single, global understanding of correctness, morality, and justice which can account for everyone's beliefs and completely understand what is right and wrong. There is right, and there is wrong. And we must seek to eradicate wrong, for we know what is right. And if you disagree with us, you are wrong."

Resist. Do not let the shills tell you what to believe in.

You make it sound like this is a two way street when in fact there is little to no accountability on the part of our handlers.

The problem is how "the rot" is defined. And having an exhaustive database or algorithm that can quickly eliminate whatever "rot" the system has defined is what makes Minority Report dystopian.

Wow, such straight up fascism, pretty much everything you just said is awful.