Wikisurveillance: A Genealogy of Cooperative Watching in the West
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article interrogates the relationship between technology and law enforcement and how changing police surveillance techniques have influenced Western expectations of privacy from the mid-19th century to the present. By examining the evolution of telecommunications devices in particular, the author identifies a diffuse and publicly inclusive system of collaborative data mining maintained by private citizens—a culture of wikisurveillance—as being a technologically determined consequence of police reforms made in 1829 Britain. From the now extinct police signal box to modern AMBER alerts, technology allows the police to be divested of their public presence as mechanical surveillance responsibilities are willingly usurped by private enterprise and largely unaccountable civilians who collectively coauthor and codify the occidental discourse on privacy. As public and private spaces alike become increasingly subject to internal, unregulated monitoring that mimics the police methodology, this article explores the origins of our present zeitgeist of mediated voyeurism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it