OK, so the presence of universal surveillance and facial recognition software now means even the "good guys" have to mask themselves to avoid retribution. It is getting harder and harder to tell the players apart. In the old days, it was simple- if they were wearing masks, they were bad guys. ( with an exception for the Lone Ranger of course:)
Of course, the act of concealing the identities of law enforcement officers from the evil dope dealers also handily conceals their identities from citizens. That is why the "secret" is in secret police.
One of the best comments I read regarding that very thing was to the effect of "if it's too dangerous for you to show your face on camera, don't be on camera." Which seemed eminently logical to me.
But I think the intent WAS to intimidate, else why have them there?
4 comments:
OK, so the presence of universal surveillance and facial recognition software now means even the "good guys" have to mask themselves to avoid retribution. It is getting harder and harder to tell the players apart. In the old days, it was simple- if they were wearing masks, they were bad guys. ( with an exception for the Lone Ranger of course:)
Of course, the act of concealing the identities of law enforcement officers from the evil dope dealers also handily conceals their identities from citizens. That is why the "secret" is in secret police.
It's a very dangerous practice, you're right.
One of the best comments I read regarding that very thing was to the effect of "if it's too dangerous for you to show your face on camera, don't be on camera." Which seemed eminently logical to me.
But I think the intent WAS to intimidate, else why have them there?
Clearly that was the intent of the language, so it's reasonable to believe it was the intent of the visual image as well.
Post a Comment