I'll have much more on this thread later. The original comment about the UK being a test model for other country's domestic surveillance efforts is a point I've made repeatedly and which I'm quite prepared to defend. I just want to point out that what this assumption:
2. it is impractical to control the use... of surveillance... through legislation,
actually means is: We don't need the 4th amendment, the FISA, or the ECPA. At best they are ineffective.
I strongly disagree with that. Recent controversies notwithstanding our government usually does obey these regulations and they do have a significant impact on the nature of our society. The embrace of legalized and ubiquitous surveillance by both state and citizen involves an oversimplified, utopian view of humanity that is on par with the accidents of communism. Perfect enforcement of perfect regulations by perfect people is a recipie for a socially impoverished society.
RE: big_brother.jpg (JPEG Image, 375x500 pixels)