What does a sensor know?

This paper explores the limitations of sensor datafication by examining the distinction between “thick” and “thin” description. While sensors excel at capturing “thin” data - characterized in traditional ethnography as raw, observable behaviors akin to what a camera records - they struggle with “thick” description, the interpretation of intentions, meanings, and cultural context. Responding to Borbach and Kanderske's work on surveillance counter-practices, the paper questions the extent to which sensors can discern between accidental glitches and deliberate subversion. The paper concludes by considering the implications of emphasizing intentionality in resistance, suggesting that while such practices are crucial, they may ultimately contribute to the refinement of sensor accuracy and power and limit how surveillance scholars conceptualize surveillance subterfuge.