Lancaster security cameras on the streets are monitored by civilians working for a nonprofit group. They pan, zoom and call police if they see a crime. Linda Johnson / For The L.A. Times

Lancaster security cameras on the streets are monitored by civilians working for a nonprofit group. They pan, zoom and call police if they see a crime. Linda Johnson / For The L.A. Times
Lancaster security cameras on the streets are monitored by civilians working for a nonprofit group. They pan, zoom and call police if they see a crime. Linda Johnson / For The L.A. Times

In which we link out to the tech news from Philly and elsewhere (when it matters) that slips through the cracks and make it way fun. See others here.
You’re probably being watched in Lancaster.
This city of 54,000 in the middle of a rural county of the same name just may be the most closely scrutinized place in the country, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.
As many as 165 closed-circuit TV cameras that will soon bring constant live surveillance of very nearly every street, park and other public space. That would be more outdoor cameras than cities as large as Boston and San Francisco.
Two more things are unique about the camera network, as the L.A. Times story suggests: it was built and maintained by a private nonprofit group and few seem concerned about the privacy implications.
The group, which hires civilians to move and follow the cameras and dispatch police to suspiscious activity, hasn’t found much public outcry.
“Years ago, there’s no way we could do this,” said Lancaster’s police chief Keith Sadler told the Times. “It brings to mind Big Brother, George Orwell and ‘1984.’ It’s just funny how Americans have softened on these issues.”
There is some question as to the effectiveness of cameras, though. In what the Times report calls the largest U.S. study, US Berkeley researchers evaluated 71 cameras that San Francisco put in high-crime areas beginning in 2005. In December, they released a report that found “no evidence” of a reduction in violent crime, though it did note “substantial declines” in property crime near the cameras.
Hat Tip Philly Tech News.
After the jump, the continued spat over a state film tax credit, robot-loving high schoolers and eight more of the week’s tech stories you shouldn’t miss, including our best read story of the last seven days.
In order of importance for your ease.

Every Friday morning we make sure you didn’t miss anything with Friday Tech Links.


4 replies on “Friday Tech Links: Big Brother in Lancaster, girls still hate tech and More”

  1. That study said that the proportion of girls that do peruse careers in Computer Sciences is extraordinarily low; NOT that “girls hate tech”. As a woman involved in the tech scene, I resent that headliner, and it’s implications. I am excited to see more and more women step up to participate in this community.
    The question remains: is interest being developed in young girls, or do they just kinda get lost in stereotypes perpetuated in the San Jose Mercury, and now, in Technically Philly? The article that you linked to at Philly.com saw the importance of this distinction – it’s a shame that didn’t translate to your blurb.

  2. Kara:
    We appreciate your concern and thanks for the comment. I do apologize for the glib headline, which was meant to do nothing but bring in a reader and then push to the Mercury News story. In the limited space of a roundup, we can never give much context.
    That said, your point is made very clear: female involvement in tech is a more sensitive issue than our headline suggests. We will strive to do better in the future.
    -cgw

  3. Chris:
    I appreciate that, and I’m all for glib or tongue-in-cheek reporting, which Technically Philly does so well. In this case however, I think it re-contextualized the content in a way that did not accurately reflect the initial intent of either the Philly.com article linked or the original study referenced. I also don’t think it was your intent to patronize any of your readers, thanks for the clarification on both points.

  4. I read that article on girls & technology when it was tweeted earlier this week. I, personally, did not find myself interested in technology until my mid-teens– and it was a total boys club.
    In general, asking a group of 13-17 year olds their feelings on studying technology pre-college is a little absurd. I couldn’t make my mind up over what I was going to wear to school a day in advance, let alone choose my future interests or ultimate career path at that age.
    Fortunately, in my 20s I’ve had the pleasure of meeting a flock of talented tech ladies with similar interests in this city’s thriving tech scene. I think that the San Jose Mercury is leaping to conclusions: perhaps boys express an earlier interest in technology at a younger age, but it seems to me that there is an almost equal mix in the field upon entering post-grad age.

Comments are closed.