U.S. border surveillance towers have always been broken

Critique of the EFF Article

• Several commenters find the article shallow or “theatrical”: heavy on rhetoric about “waste” and “pork,” light on new facts or technical detail.
• Some argue it conflates historic failed programs (Boeing, General Dynamics projects) with newer systems (e.g., Anduril towers) without evidence they share the same flaws.
• Others defend the piece, noting it cites GAO, DHS, and RAND reports saying key systems were not shown to be effective, and view it as part of a longer documented pattern of failure.

Effectiveness of Surveillance Towers and Cameras

• Disagreement over whether broken cameras imply the concept is flawed or just poorly executed/maintained.
• One side: cameras are a “crucial tool” for monitoring any border; failures are due to bad contracts, oversight, and maintenance, not the technology.
• Other side: decades of poor data, minimal impact on apprehensions, and mismanagement suggest surveillance is a “wasteful endeavor” and not solving the real problem.
• RAND’s findings are contested: some say they show no impact; others say they show deterrence (fewer crossings in surveilled areas) and increased apprehensions for other technologies.

Scale, Logistics, and Practical Limits

• Multiple participants stress the southern border’s vast, harsh, roadless terrain; responding to every detection is logistically extreme and very expensive.
• Debate over whether “absolute security” is even desirable; many see it as unrealistic, violent, and not cost‑effective.

Alternative Approaches to Immigration Control

• Strong current in the thread: attack labor demand by enforcing employment eligibility, criminalizing employers who hire undocumented workers, and/or using national ID or verification systems.
• Others suggest immigration system reform, faster asylum processing, and focusing resources on ports of entry rather than remote deserts.
• Some advocate more open or market-based immigration; others emphasize future climate refugees and argue for tighter regulation now.

Civil Liberties and EFF’s Scope

• Disagreement on whether EFF should be involved: some say border surveillance is squarely a tech/civil-liberties issue; others see the article as drifting into general immigration politics.

Politics and Framing

• Several note that border security is a politicized wedge issue; some argue it is kept unsolved to serve political narratives and economic interests (cheap labor).
• The thread highlights a spectrum between open and closed borders, with most rejecting both extremes but disagreeing strongly about where to land.