Thread by @dstock_insights

Thread 👇

Chennai has the highest density of CCTV cameras in the world, with 657 cameras per square km. Hyderabad comes in second with 480 cameras per square km.

📹 CCTV's : 282,126
🌏 Population: 11.2Million
👥 Per 1000 people: 24.53
🚨 Crime Index : 41
#ChennaiPolice

In Comparison

Indore:
📹 62 per 1000 people (Total 200,600 CCTV'S)
🚨Crime Index: 54

Hyderabad:
📹41 per 1000 people (Total 440,299)
🚨 Crime index : 44

Delhi:
📹 26 per 1000 people ( Total 436,600)
🚨 Crime index: 58

Singapore:
📹 18 per 1000 people( Total 108,981)
🚨 Crime Index: 28

Beijing:
📹 56 per 1000 people ( Total 1,150,000)
🚨 Crime Index: 34

Potential issues with mass surveillance through the use of CCTV cameras:

Privacy concerns: Some people may feel that their privacy is being violated by being constantly monitored by CCTV cameras.

Ineffectiveness: Despite their widespread use, CCTV cameras have not been shown to be effective at reducing crime.

Misuse of footage: There have been cases where CCTV footage has been used for purposes other than crime prevention, such as blackmail or harassment.

Cost: Installing and maintaining a large network of CCTV cameras can be expensive, and the benefits may not outweigh the costs.

Inaccuracy: CCTV cameras can sometimes produce unclear or distorted footage, making it difficult to identify individuals or accurately assess what is happening in a given situation.

Lack of accountability: Because CCTV cameras are often operated by government agencies or private companies, there may be a lack of accountability for how the footage is used and who has access to it.

There is currently no legislation in place to protect the privacy of citizens – facial recognition is a harmful and invasive technology.

Mass surveillance poses risks for every citizen in the country and specifically to historically marginalised communities, such as religious and sexual minorities, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the Dalit and Adivasi communities

👥
Police do not have the right to search an individual without a warrant. If a police officer asks to search your phone, you can politely refuse and tell them that they need a warrant to do so.

Also they don't have the right to take photographs of individuals without their consent, unless they have a warrant to do so or are conducting an investigation for a specific crime.

If a police officer takes a picture of you without your consent, you can ask them why they are doing so and remind them that it is your right to protect your personal privacy.

If they do not have a valid legal justification for taking the photograph, you can refuse to allow them to take it and tell them that you do not consent to being photographed.

Government has to develop clear laws and regulations governing the use of these technologies, including strict limits on when and how they can be used.

Establish independent bodies to monitor the use of these technologies and ensure that they are being used in a responsible and lawful manner.

Independent audit to see if certain section of people disproportionately impacted.

Blurring out faces in surveillance footages using AI to protect privacy.

Blurred footage can be still useful to find clues like clothing and location if crime happened.

Still there is no one-size-fits-all approach to addressing the use of FRT and other mass surveillance, and the best approach will depend on the specific circumstances and challenges faced by each individual government.

Links to few resources 👇

google.com/amp/s/m.thewir…

thewire.in/rights/hyderab…

visualcapitalist.com/mapped-the-top…

comparitech.com/vpn-privacy/th…