Noel Barrera

       In Omniscient, the entire story revolves around the law, criminal activity, and legality of the surveillance. As stated in previous posts the city in which Nina and other live is not the standard of a nation, but instead for a single city. Outside this city law functions, much like it currently does with police and detectives preventing and solving crime. The city with its drones nullifies their use entirely. The entire legal system for the city is the drone, crimes cannot be reported without your drone going off, and this fits well with the whole point of the show, why did Nina's fathers' drone not signal when he was murdered? Legally he is dead, but his drone did not go off and this causes the entire catalyst on why Nina wants to find out why, is there a deep state, a sinister plan, etc. But no matter how that plays out the fact is for the city Nina lives in, the legal issue of drones is null, as it is the system that their law runs on. How can you call into...

Omniscient continues with Nina still fighting her way to the top of Omniscient to further her goal of finding her father's killer. The main theme of this episode is how drones affect humans, more specifically the interference with their privacy and freedom. Part of the episode even takes place in a prison where people who have been imprisoned due to the system tell Nina and other trainees that they will never know freedom until they are drone-less.    This weeks topic of culture, laws, and interaction of technology and people fits perfectly with this episode, I have before touched on the laws, or cultures such as the idea spewed by the corporate big shots, and politicians that safety is more important than privacy, and fail-safes such as the footage not being human-reviewed fit the bill of technology culture, and diffusion. However how widespread is the diffusion if only one city (to my knowledge) in the entire world decides this is the correct way of law enforcement? The peop...