how could he not have referred to bentham's _panopticon_ [1], which outlined a system where everyone believes they may be watched at any time, and the watchers are also "wide open to the body of the curious at large"?
for those unfamiliar with the concept (the 18th century language is hardly concise), the panopticon is a proposal for a prison where all inhabitants - and all activity - can be observed from a central point, but the observed cannot know when they are being observed. to ensure that the wardens aren't abusing their power either, the observation chamber is open to the public who, unlike in a regular prison, can easily and instantly see what the wardens are up to. broaden this to society at large and you have everyone potentially watching everyone else, including the "authorised" watchers (or the police), i.e. a transparent society... On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 11:20 +0530, Udhay Shankar N wrote: > [2] http://www.davidbrin.com/tschp1.html 1. http://cartome.org/panopticon2.htm#VI.
