As I write this article it is possible for me to be observed remotely in a number of ways:
-Activating my smartphone's camera or microphone and retrieving data
-Taking a picture of me via my computer's webcam
-Intercepting data packets between me and the web
-Putting in a request to Google for the information being saved to my Blogger account
The NSA is known to participate in surveillance in all of the above ways and more. You can learn more in a number of places online - this video explores some of the leaked NSA documents in detail and is worth a watch if you are so inclined.
Clearly this is bad. Of course, such surveillance is done in the name of National Security but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who buys into the idea of the NSA truly benefiting the public. More realistically, these systems are used to keep an eye on any potential dissent - conveniently labelled as terrorism - so that it can be dealt with pro-actively. As surveillance technology becomes more sophisticated and the world's elite more terrified of a discontent public, this trend will only intensify.
One often discussed outcome of this trend is a 1984-like surveillance state era. This could last a year, a decade, or many generations, but I don't believe it is possible for such a world to last forever - it simply is not a stable state. There will always be a seed of dissatisfaction in the minds of the repressed. As long as that seed exists it will eventually grow to a mighty branch and dismantle the repressive power structures in a (hopefully quick and non-violent) revolution.
How, then, do we handle this situation? How can we avoid an era of repression, however long? Should we destroy the evil cameras, mute the dark microphones of repression, and break the World Wide Web of deception? The impossibility of such notions aside, it is ultimately incorrect to attribute morality to technology. Human beings can use technology to destructive ends, but it is the human doing the deed. Furthermore, as any piece technology is merely an idea manifested in the physical world, it seems impossible to eradicate any particular tech entirely.
Like any idea, the best way to handle our discomfort with technology is to attempt to understand and incorporate it into our reality in such a way that our discomfort disappears. Thus, I will attempt herein to understand our relationship with surveillance technologies and explore some potential implications of this sticky situation.
First, let us consider where the problem lies. I would feel a lot better about being watched if I knew that I could watch my watcher as well. This is called sousveillance - turning the one-way street of surveillance into mutual observation. Surely this would eliminate some of the negative aspects of surveillance such as political repression - the repressors have a lot more to hide than your average terrorist (read: political activist), and so this forced accountability would certainly bring some positive change in the world.
So, a big part of what makes us uncomfortable with surveillance is the imbalance of access to such technologies and the power structures that arise from this imbalance. Of course, many people are a little uneasy with the idea of their personal lives being put on display, but I consider political repression to be a far bigger problem than personal privacy. I would much prefer the embarrassment of a personal moment being publicized to being jailed and/or killed for my political views. That said, the same logic would apply to personal privacy - being watched in the bathroom would be easier to handle if I could watch those watching me as well. It would be difficult to condemn anyone for an embarrassing personal moment if yours were on full display as well. "Let him without sin cast the first stone". I will discuss the issue of privacy in more depth below.
Now, for the sake of discussion I'm going to make a few assumptions and discuss their implications. I make no claims as to the physical plausibility of the details here, so please spare me any such argument.
A thought experiment.
Let's assume that in the near future nanotechnology (or, perhaps more appropriately, femtotechnology) has progressed to the point where we can embed surveillance devices into atoms themselves. These devices are made of subatomic particles and can be churned out by the mole. These don't change the physical/chemical properties of the universe at all, but quickly become manufactured in such quantity that nearly all of the atoms on our planet have these devices embedded in them. They record every sound and sight (including electromagnetic radiation beyond the visible light spectrum) and store it in perfect fidelity. They are networked in such a way that any one of them has access to all of the information stored in the entire cloud, and can be retrieved at any time by absolutely anyone.
If you're not convinced or don't understand the above, the mechanism here is really irrelevant. The point is that at any time, any individual can access any information about any other individual, past or present. This is a powerful idea with some intriguing implications.
Let's consider first the result this would have on our political power structures. The political, financial, and corporate elite would have all of their secrets laid out on the table for everyone to see. Their deceptions and agendas would be clear as day, and this alone would likely lead to some fairly wide-spread social and political changes. Even the court of law would change drastically, as evidence would be easily acquired to prove or disprove any individual's guilt. Suffice to say, existing power structures would potentially be uprooted completely.
How about our personal lives? It would be nigh impossible to be dishonest - your claims could be verified with ease at any time. What about your darkest secrets? Sorry, not secret any more. That embarrassing fetish of yours? Yeah, your mother knows about that now...alllll about it. This sounds pretty uncomfortable to most people, myself included, but this discomfort should raise a flag in our minds - does it arise from the situation itself or from our relation to it? Perhaps the discomfort can be alleviated not by changing out situation but by understanding and changing our relation to it.
Well, why do we keep secrets? Why don't I want my family watching me have sex, or someone I'm attracted to watching me evacuate after a night of beer and tex-mex? Where does this shame come from? After all, everyone poops and sex is a beautifully human phenomenon. Is our tendency to keep things private a neurosis borne of fear? Fear of ostracism, of rejection, of inferiority, of God etc...these fears are so strong that we carry some of our darkest secrets to the grave. Can we be blamed for such secrecy? Many cultures as well as social circles condemn aspects of natural human behavior to such an extreme that it would be social (and sometimes physical) suicide to fully expose ourselves.
So, how would it impact our lives to have all of our doings on full display for anyone who cared to look? One potential result would be for everyone to behave as if in a panopticon, neurotically conforming as much as possible to some behavioral ideal to avoid social condemnation. This stage would necessarily be temporary - like the surveillance state described above it is simply not stable. There would always be a seed of neurosis resulting from repressing natural behaviors in favor of a social ideal. People would become exhausted by the constant effort required to conform, compounded by the knowledge that everyone else is just as messed up (read: human) as them, and let go completely.
This letting-go is the key takeaway from this thought experiment. A great deal of suffering in the world comes from people lying and hiding themselves in a misguided attempt at protecting themselves. The truth is that we are strongest when we are completely vulnerable, if only we had the wisdom to let our defenses down. Perhaps by showing the absolute extreme of self-censorship and displaying the imperfections of others we can exhaust that part of our minds that tries so hard to maintain composure and show that it was never worth it anyways.
In the end, it comes down to self-love - a quality sorely lacking in modern society. There are some who would be totally unaffected by such a change - those who faced their inner demons long ago and who love themselves so completely that they need not keep any secrets. These are spiritually, emotionally, and often physically healthy individuals. It is unfortunate that not everyone's path leads them to such freedom, but perhaps such a ubiquitous surveillance system would force the entire planet down the uncomfortable but fruitful path of self-understanding.
Certainly there are other less extreme ways to arrive at a place of global self-love, but I don't believe it outside the realm of possibility for surveillance technology to play a big part in re-defining humanity. Just look at the way the internet has altered how humans interact in such a short time!
As a final note, remember that this was a thought experiment founded on some fairly significant initial assumptions. I don't by any means suggest that such a path is one we should strive for, but simply mean to show that it is one potential conclusion of our current relationship with surveillance technologies, and that in the end it may not be a bad one. At the very least I hope that exploring these possibilities will tell us a bit about ourselves. I've had some intense conversations surround this idea and find it prone to producing strong reactions from people - this is excellent and I welcome any criticisms or comments below!
