The city of London has so many cameras in public places that it’s estimated the average Londoner is photographed 300 times each day. This, of course, is old news. Along the fact that they have the technology to read the license plate numbers on cars … and match them up with databases that matter. Did these cars pay their $14 daily entry fee to drive into the city of London? Is the car connected to some situation for which the authorities might want to question the driver and possibly the passengers, too?

While everyone has been thinking about whether or not this is way too invasive, the Brits have gone ahead and moved the whole situation up a notch. Some time in the next year they will install the “Automated Number Plate Recognition System” on all the major highways in England and Wales, as well as other roads and intersections they find interesting.

In fact, they don’t even have to commit to what is and is not interesting. The technology is mobile and can be set up just about anywhere.

So, is this a countrywide invasion of privacy? Maybe. Maybe not.

Following the London subways bombings and the attempt at another incident some two weeks later, the police were able to immediately release photographs of those who were suspects. Despite the ensuing fateful encounter with a young man who unfortunately chose to run, the results were gratifying. There are few other places on the face of the Earth which could have spewed out viable leads so quickly.

Still, it is the everyday that matters most. Take a neighborhood riddled with crime. Organizing a neighborhood watch is still the first and best defense. Yet this requires local people in the street. Their presence needs to be felt. Yet they may be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and become a victim of the very violence they are trying to halt. In this case, why wouldn’t an electronic eye – and all the data in the world to back it up – be preferable?

Many electronic eyes, in fact, would have far more chilling an effect on potential criminals. Yet the effect may extend to the citizens, as well.

There’s that uncomfortable feeling that someone may be watching us, and that we don’t know what information is being collected, or how it will be used. And for how long it will be kept. After all, databases can accumulate and stay in place indefinitely.

While this technology appears to make us more safe then ever, are our feelings justified?

It’s that old saw: “Technology is a two-edged sword.” Unfortunately, it’s not exactly true. Technology is more like a light saber, like the one in Luke Skywalker’s tight grip. As well as Darth Vader’s. The problem with this metaphor is that there appears to be no apparent good that results when the light saber is simply turned on – it was designed to be a weapon after all. But it does work in this regard. Light sabers can cut in every direction – not just two, and the downsides of technology are many and complex. While a camera’s data might be irrelevant one day, this same data can become explosive the next, linked to another piece of data in another database or another piece of data which suddenly appears.

So, it’s not so much deciding whether this new British technology is good or bad. It will no doubt cut many, many ways. Our job in the years and decades and centuries to come, is to nurture all technology’s good sides and be watchful of its downsides … in the fullness of its effect.

I'm Moira Gunn. This is Five Minutes.