Cameras Everywhere in the New Perversion of “Social Credit” By James Reed

     The technocrats really know how to knock us, by using our term, “social credit,” which now describes the Chinese system of state surveillance and accountability of all subjects, which could not be further from the freedom philosophy of Douglas social credit. But, this Chinese idea has been now exported to the West, coming to a street near you, and we have Google to thanks for this form of modern surveillance:
  https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/02/12/google-social-credit-system.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20200212Z1&et_cid=DM455650&et_rid=809082137

“Google, of course, is a perfect fit for this kind of Orwellian surveillance scheme. It is, by far, the largest monopoly the world has ever seen, and its data-siphoning tentacles reach deep into our everyday lives, collecting data on every move you make and conversation you have, whether online or in the real world. Google actually tracks your movements online, even when you don't think you are using their products. Most websites you visit use the 'free' Google Analytics program to track everything you do on a website.   Google purchased Urchin Software back in 2005, and by giving it away were able to integrate this important surveillance tool into most of the internet. Google Analytics integrates with Google's ad network monopoly, as well as the largest email service Gmail. These systems are not free, they are a tightly integrated package of surveillance tools - selling your data, selling ads served to you, and manipulating content to direct your behavior. These tools collect data along with other Google products like the Android 'smart' phones, the Nest home security system, and even Google's Home Assistant.  You can expect these surveillance products to become free over time as the absolute goal is to exploit every bit of data they can collect from you. A 2015 Wired article3 revealed some of the details of how Google's online empire is built, noting "One of the company's cluster switches provides about 40 terabits per second of bandwidth — the equivalent of 40 million home internet connections," and "Google now sends more information between its data centers than it trades with the internet as a whole."

As highlighted in a January 27, 2020, article by The Intercept, smart camera networks equipped with facial recognition and video analytic software will advance global surveillance even further, and should be banned to prevent an inevitable slide into invisible yet all-encompassing authoritarianism. "The rise of all-seeing smart camera networks is an alarming development that threatens civil rights and liberties throughout the world. Law enforcement agencies have a long history of using surveillance against marginalized communities, and studies show surveillance chills freedom of expression — ill effects that could spread as camera networks grow larger and more sophisticated," The Intercept notes. According to Fast Company, China's social credit system is not entirely unique. "A parallel system is developing in the United States, in part as the result of Silicon Valley and technology-industry user policies, and in part by surveillance of social media activity by private companies," Fast Company writes. For example, life insurance companies can now use content shared in social media posts to determine your premium. "That Instagram pic showing you teasing a grizzly bear at Yellowstone with a martini in one hand, a bucket of cheese fries in the other, and a cigarette in your mouth, could cost you," Fast Company notes. PatronScan is another example. These devices are used by restaurants to identify fake IDs and undesirable customers — people previously removed from an establishment for causing a fight, committing sexual assault, stealing or doing drugs. The list is shared among PatronScan customers, so getting banned in one bar or restaurant effectively bans you from all bars and restaurants in the U.S., Canada and U.K. for up to one year. For additional examples, see the original Fast Company article.”

     Instead of dealing with this threat to freedom at the most basic level, the politicians are going along with Big Tech, including Trump, who see Big Tech as part of his mad MAGA. It is all useful for their own drive for social control.
  https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/02/12/justin-danhof-google-is-the-biggest-bully-in-silicon-valley/
  https://issuesinsights.com/2020/02/04/when-the-bully-controls-the-search/

“In recent years, it is hard to fathom a greater bully than Google. During its first shareholder meeting following Trump’s victory, I asked Eric Schmidt, then chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, if conservatives and their worldviews were welcome at the company. Schmidt dismissed my question by wildly claiming that everyone at the company – and indeed the collective tech industry – was in unanimous agreement politically and philosophically. After the meeting, however, a strange thing happened: I started to receive emails from “closeted” conservative Google employees thanking me for standing up for them. I remember thinking that these emails sounded like they were written by folks in prison. Not long after the shareholder meeting, Google engineer James Damore penned his now-famous memo calling on the company to take strides in achieving true diversity rather than just hiring and promoting based on skin color and race. Google, ever the oppressor, fired him. The message was clear: dissent is not welcome in Mountain View, California. In the backdrop of these public-facing events, a case has been winding its way through the courts which further demonstrates Google’s tyrannical tendencies. Last November, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Google v. Oracle. The facts of the case are basic and not much in dispute. Google allegedly stole thousands of lines of code from Oracle’s Java program for its Android operating system. It’s that simple. What’s Google’s defense for doing so? It claims that Oracle shouldn’t be allowed to copyright Java. Google further asserts that its theft fits into copyright exceptions, including “fair use” and “transformative use.” These are absurd arguments, but they trend with Google’s oppressive tactics specifically, and the left’s disdain for private property generally. Liberals have long abhorred private property, so it is unsurprising that much of the tech industry is lining up behind Google. This is all despite Google’s sordid history of appropriating other tech competitors’ work products. In 2013, Google, along with Cisco Systems, paid TiVo nearly $500 million to settle a copyright infringement lawsuit concerning the company’s DVR technology. Two years before that, the U.S. Department of Justice levied a $500 million fine against Google for abetting piracy. Earlier this month, Sonos sued Google in federal court alleging that Google had stolen five of its patents. t’s no wonder that Google dropped its motto “Don’t be Evil” in 2018. It can’t make such a claim with a straight face.”

     We already far beyond anything found in George Orwell’s 1984.