Views: 1
When George Orwell wrote the novel 1984, he imagined a world dominated by a central power that constantly monitored its citizens. The famous “Big Brother” was a state-run control system with almost unlimited resources and a gigantic bureaucratic machine.
However, there is something Orwell could hardly have foreseen: that decades later, much of that surveillance would not be carried out by governments… but by private companies, algorithms, and connected devices, at a surprisingly low cost and with enormous economic benefits.
Surveillance continues to evolve, although we are often unaware of it. The camera at the door: convenience and surveillance.
Today, it is very common to find smart cameras at the entrance of many homes. These devices allow you to see from your mobile phone who is ringing the doorbell, who is approaching the door, or even talk to the person in real time.
One of the best-known examples is the Amazon Ring system, developed by Amazon. These types of devices are sold as home security tools: they help prevent burglaries, monitor packages, or simply keep track of who approaches our house.
But there's an important detail: the camera doesn't just see whoever rings the doorbell; it also captures anyone who walks by. And this information, in addition to being visible to the device owner, can also be managed by the company providing the service.
A few weeks ago, Amazon launched an experimental program in the United States called Search Party. The idea seemed innocent enough: to use Ring cameras and artificial intelligence systems to locate lost pets.
To achieve this, the system had to analyze images captured by thousands of cameras installed in private homes. The artificial intelligence would detect animals that matched the characteristics of a missing pet.
The problem was obvious. To find a pet, it was necessary to analyze absolutely everything that happened in front of those cameras: people, neighbors, pedestrians, delivery drivers, or any citizen simply walking down the street.
The initiative sparked intense controversy regarding privacy and mass surveillance, as it effectively created a vast private monitoring network.
Finally, a few weeks later, Amazon decided to cancel the program, but the debate was already underway.
For decades, surveillance and information gathering activities—traditionally known as “intelligence”—were almost exclusively the responsibility of governments. Each country had its own agencies, protocols, and legal limits (at least in theory) based on national interest.
Today, the landscape is very different. Large technology companies possess more data, more sensors, and greater analytical capacity than many governments.
They have information about:
. where we are
. what we buy
. who we talk to
. what routes we take
. what websites we visit
And so on…
In many cases, this information is analyzed, packaged, and sold as a service. In fact, governments are already buying tools from private companies for:
. facial recognition
. behavioral analysis
. social media monitoring
. cybersecurity and cyberattacks
In other words: intelligence has become a market. A huge… and almost invisible business. The data economy is one of the fastest-growing sectors in the digital world.
For many technology companies, personal data is the most valuable asset. And most people aren't even fully aware of how much is being collected about their daily lives.
Every free app, every smart device, every connected camera, or every virtual assistant generates information that can be turned into a commercial product.
Thus, our privacy has gradually transformed into a commodity within a multi-billion dollar global industry.
What can we, as citizens, do?
The reality is that ordinary citizens have little individual power to act against this trend.
We can make small decisions: review app permissions, limit what we share, or choose more privacy-friendly services. But the problem is structural.
True protection can only come from clear and mandatory regulations that limit the use of personal data and control how companies collect and sell that information.
It is the responsibility of governments to establish these rules and ensure they are enforced. And they must do so urgently, which they are not doing today.
The great dilemma is: convenience or privacy. We must acknowledge that there is a factor that is difficult to ignore: convenience.
Free apps, digital assistants, smart cameras, and personalized services make our lives easier. And many people accept the exchange of data in return for these benefits.
That is the true dilemma of the digital society. We want technology that simplifies our lives… but every advance usually comes with a new level of surveillance.
The surveillance of the future will clearly not resemble the Big Brother imagined by Orwell. It will not have a single face or a single center of power.
It will be much more diffuse. And precisely for that reason, much harder to detect.
EN 
ES