Quote from: Sherwood_Archer on November 22, 2018, 01:17:23 PM

And I am talking about "smart cities". I was reading this article > https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/11/google-sidewalk-labs/575551/

It says: Soon enough, well have a smart city: Sidewalk Labs, a subsidiary of Googles parent company, Alphabet, is building one from the internet up, with help from a series of private-public real-estate partnerships in the downtown Toronto neighborhood Quayside.

The vision document imagines not only the revitalization of a 12-acre plot that has sat largely vacant since its heyday as an industrial port, but its transformation into a micro-city outfitted with smart technologies that will use data to disrupt everything from traffic congestion to health care, housing, zoning regulations, and greenhouse-gas emissions.

But all those data require mechanisms to collect them, and the march to an always on city has drawn an onslaught of accusations against Sidewalk Labs and its real-estate partner, Waterfront Toronto, for dismissing privacy concerns and misinforming residents. In the past month, four people have resigned from Waterfront Torontos and Sidewalk Labs advisory board over concerns about privacy and lack of public input.
-
If you were informed beforehand about all these privacy concerns, would you still live in a "smart" city that is supposedly convenient and "smart" to live in?

I would agree to live in a smart city like this one only if I was paid for the data that I would produce. Otherwise, there is not any point of sharing my data. I mean if I don't have any benefit from that.