Different people in different places accept being "watched" in various circumstances, but it must be assumed that everyone has their limits.

A recent report on one particular kind of "watching" claims that even the ones who have been watching the watchers were "startled" by the results of a US Congressional study:

Wireless firms flooded by requests to aid surveillance

Law enforcement agencies seek text messages, caller locations and other information
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
New York Times
7/9/2012

WASHINGTON — In the first public accounting of its kind, cellphone carriers reported that they responded to a startling 1.3 million demands for subscriber information last year from law enforcement agencies seeking text messages, caller locations and other information in the course of investigations.

The cellphone carriers' reports, which come in response to a Congressional inquiry, document an explosion in cellphone surveillance in the last five years, with the companies turning over records thousands of times a day in response to police emergencies, court orders, law enforcement subpoenas and other requests.

The reports also reveal a sometimes uneasy partnership with law enforcement agencies, with the carriers frequently rejecting demands that they considered legally questionable or unjustified. At least one carrier even referred some inappropriate requests to the F.B.I.

The information represents the first time data have been collected nationally on the frequency of cell surveillance by law enforcement.

The volume of the requests reported by the carriers — which most likely involve several million subscribers — surprised even some officials who have closely followed the growth of cell surveillance.

[More details at the link]

The article points out the conflict resulting from the SCOTUS ruling that placing a GPS tracking device on a suspects car was illegal without a warrant, but it's unclear whether using the GPS in a phone, or the cell tower locations the phone "pings," also requires a warrant or other legal permission. Most police agencies now act as if they don't think any legal justification is needed.

The 1.3 million requests is a very big jump from (what is known about) previous years, but isn't particularly astonishing relative to the population; but many of the requests have been for "tower dumps" that may include information on hundreds, or in some cases, thousands of individuals. And there is no regulation of how long informated reported to police may be retained or what security is required for police records.

London was reported a few years ago as having "more surveillance cameras than any other city in the world" and there have been several reports of significant additions to the system, all of which are monitored at a central location at London police HQ. Recent reports of a UK plan to "track all phones" also have been seen. This surveillance hasn't been obviously objectionable to Brits, but small towns here raise a fuss when they put up a camera to watch for someone running a stop light/sign.

We also seem to have a few here who are paranoid concerned about "tracking cookies" on their browsers.

Specific comments on police use of cell phone user information, as reported at the link, is the main subject here,

but there is the additional curiosity about:

WHAT REALLY SHOULD BOTHER US?

John