Introduction
A smart city, like the originally planned Quayside, has various parties that would have impacts, such as investing and adapting themselves to the new technology in the city. They would modernize their facility, organization, or other infrastructure to create the town with the latest technology. Sidewalk Labs is an example of such a beneficiary, as it will profit enormously from developing innovative urban solutions. Consequently, it would affect city residents because they are more likely to use cutting-edge technologies in their daily lives and careers [1]. Ordinary citizens will suffer from the innovations: the immediate loss will be the ability to plan an entire neighborhood, which can maximize the improvement of impressive public spaces, affordable housing, and rapid transit.
The citizens of the smart city would face new privacy problems since their actions or movements are recorded and monitored. A citizen’s privacy would be in danger because the government of this city could now have access to their data [1]. The general principles of data protection include legality, fairness, transparency, accountability, and restraint. The biggest problem is transparency since Sidewalk Labs did not inform anyone about the upcoming projects and kept developments hidden. In addition, residents were not explained what their data was needed for. Accountability raises a big question as it is unknown how to control and protect data flow in a comprehensive project like Sidewalk.
On the other hand, smart cities have some benefits by enabling efficient data collection. The enhanced computing landscape built into the infrastructure is certainly not evil, as smart meters prevent power outages, and telemedicine saves lives. Sidewalk Labs’ developments will allow the state to control traffic better and track the weather. Another benefit of smart cities is that they would boost economic growth because there are more opportunities and jobs in the technology sector [1]. One last benefit of smart cities is that they would create an appealing and modern urban environment that attracts businesses and investment, leading to a sustainable economy.
Data Collection Embedded in Infrastructure Violates Individual Privacy
The infrastructure built into data collection violates privacy when citizens are being monitored. This phenomenon is possible because the government can collect unnecessary data about its citizens. As a result, personal integrity is threatened, and the government’s credibility is undermined. The main problem lies in the imposition of a top-down model chosen by Sidewalk Labs. They follow the principle that the state does not care whether citizens want their city to look like a laboratory. It can lead to a societal catastrophe in societies where trust in government is high, such as the Canadian one. Their socio-political philosophy is “in Canada, it’s peace, order, and good government” [2]. To create a genuinely effective innovation model, one must consider citizens’ opinions and concerns about their right to privacy [3]. Without this approach, smart cities based on Sidewalk technologies are doomed to inevitable failure.
Smart infrastructure violates personal privacy, making it easier for governments to profile people. For example, people can be profiled based on their religion, race, ethnicity, and gender [1]. Profiling allows the government to treat people differently; this can lead to discrimination or harmful prejudice as a result. Surveillance programs typically target groups such as minorities, security agencies, and unintended targets, including innocent civilians. It means that there will always be people who fall victim to surveillance because they are part of a particular group defined by governments. Categories such as the poor, single mothers, and minorities suffer significantly from the harm done to privacy due to biased algorithms. The only way to avoid this is not to be part of these groups.
Moreover, infrastructure built into data collection that uses sensitive information can be used to blackmail a person. It means that people can be blackmailed because of their data, and it cannot be erased. The intelligent infrastructure can also lead to identity theft, such as when individuals’ passwords are stolen. They may lose their authentication information and become a victim of identity theft.
Governments and corporations cannot ignore citizens’ concerns about their safety and fundamental rights that may be violated with the introduction of a smart city system. New laws are being drafted, and data protection acts are being enacted to protect people’s privacy. However, the question is whether citizens want their data to be used on such a scale. Despite the good intentions of Sidewalk Labs projects, many people do not want to be constantly under the eye of cameras.
A city fully equipped with sensors and tracking systems is certainly possible to stand. However, it may no longer be the city that the townspeople knew and loved. Sidewalk Labs, however, would have turned the cities into a robotic modular lab with a network of sensors. The state must quickly develop methods to protect citizens from strangers’ penetration into their private lives. However, the bureaucratic machine is too slow for the pace of the development of modern technologies.
Surveillance is Necessary to Enable the Smooth Running of Civic Operations
Surveillance is necessary to enhance civic operations’ smooth running because it helps pinpoint and curb illegal activities. Surveillance enables the government to monitor and track down individuals likely engaging in a crime or violating the law [1]. Technological devices provided by the Sidewalk Labs project will assist in reducing crime since the government will be informed when and where a crime is expected to occur [1]. This prior knowledge gives them adequate security measures to prevent such crimes [1]. For example, the police might have cameras set up at specific locations since they know that there is a high rate of drug trafficking in that area. Eventually, the government will be able to arrest criminals before they commit any crimes.
There are surveillance programs that aim to protect people’s civil rights. For instance, a program known as the tracking and tracing initiative aims to curb drug trafficking and other kinds of illegal activities [1]. It is done by creating DNA profiles of individuals suspected of drug trafficking at airports across the country in case they try to evade the watchful eye of authorities. It helps protect people’s civil rights by ensuring that offenders cannot commit crimes without being caught.
Conclusion
However, surveillance can cause harm to society and corrupt the civic government. Adverse effects include violating an individual’s anonymity rights, such as privacy invasion and profiling. With surveillance, the government has complete control of citizens’ activities, which is not what the government is supposed to do. According to Secco, it can even manipulate and direct the behavior of individuals using video, audio, and textual data [4]. Therefore, it should not be used as a tool for the authorities to keep track of law-abiding people’s activities. Surveillance is an analytically powerful tool with dual effects.
References
Rob Kitchin. 2014. The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism – GeoJournal. SpringerLink.
Karrie Jacobs. 2022. Toronto wants to kill the smart city forever. (2022).
Anthony Townsend. 2013. Smart Cities: Big Data, Civic Hackers, and the Quest for a New Utopia. London, W. W. Norton.
Leyland Secco. 2019. ‘Surveillance capitalism’: critic urges Toronto to abandon smart city project. (2019).
Footnotes
Rob Kitchin. 2014. The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism – GeoJournal. SpringerLink. Web.
Karrie Jacobs. 2022. Toronto wants to kill the smart city forever. (2022). Web.
Anthony Townsend. 2013. Smart Cities: Big Data, Civic Hackers, and the Quest for a New Utopia. London, W. W. Norton.
Leyland Secco. 2019. ‘Surveillance capitalism’: critic urges Toronto to abandon smart city project. (2019). Web.