Hacker News

Until SCOTUS rules that parallel construction is a constitutional violation, the FBI is free to track everyone and build cases from illegal data.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

Unfortunately, “SCOTUS previously declared this unconstitutional” doesn’t have quite the same sense of finality it used to these days.

No, the court ruled that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their cell phone records. You're going to get to some weird and inoperative places if you try to generalize from jurisprudence like this. You do not generally have an established right to move without being observed in the US; the very fact that you're required to keep a clearly visible tracking device on your car or motorcycle shows that.

Why would they care lol

Funny you should mention this. Benn Jordan, on the heels of his Flock camera research, reverse engineered a non-flock ALRP unit and built his own system using some off the shelf parts, a tablet, and 3D printer. He did it mostly as an experiment but also due to the fact that Flock's algorithm for image detection is astoundingly bad and has a high incident of reading plates incorrectly.

There are a handful of open-source models for license plate detection, I forget exactly which model outperformed the rest, but it was an excellent watch and help me really understand just how inefficient these commercial systems are and how easy they can be to defeat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ

Everyone's got an old Android phone or two sitting in their junk drawer, right? Place it in your window and connect it to the shared, open, public service. Might work, but then if it's open and shared, Flock can simply connect to the open API and add a new category "Public cameras" to their own data.

Any data we make available as an open system will also be available to bad actors.

I’ve toyed with the concept

Realistically there’s not a ton that can be done at the level of a mayor or even state senator

I wish people wouldn't say that, it's not the case.

First, pushback requires equivalent effort. If 10,000 towns are uncooperative because 10,000 mayors resist this, the amount of political power to overcome this is incredibly large. The mayors can delay or cancel projects with uncooperative or malicious vendors. They can slow down approvals. This administration and the powers that want this espionage power understand this, which is why they target downstream races, school boards, and sheriff positions.

Second, a state senator is much, much more powerful than you give them credit. There are usually much fewer of them than members of the US House or Senate, so they individually more voting power. They can substantially influence state politics, and it is magnified with majorities and committees.

Third, resources are pooled and parties coordinate, so starving them of influence, which is root of all their funding, is key to voting undemocratic parties out of office.

Don't believe what you read about politics online. It is made for modern, shallow consumption. Little races matter.

You can make a large difference by participating directly, too. You don't even have to make a scene about it in your platform. Just run, be boring, win, and talk with your votes.

This might seem cynical, but it appears to me the uniparty has already decided it wants a total surveillance state.

Having achieved total coverage of the observable domestic cyber realm, the next objective is a physical layer.

Anyone arguing against it is a terrorist sympathizer or has criminal intent. This is for the safety of the homeland, after all.

This is also why car dependent infrastructure is a bad thing for Americans’ freedom.

You have more civil rights as a pedestrian than you do in a licensed motor vehicle.

> I’d love to see people running on banning red light/license plate cameras

Not me. We've become way too soft on vehicle crime which is often tied to other crimes. I'd love to see a lot more automated enforcement: speeding, red light running, shoulder riding, missing or fake tags, noise violations, car emissions, etc.

It’s possible - tech is neutral

The people creating, funding, controlling, developing, deploying and using the tech are not neutral, and the technology is indistinguishable from those people. In light of that, I would argue your assertion, that the "tech is neutral", is nothing more than rhetoric and that in every meaningful way the tech lacks neutrality.

> Imagine your boss getting real time feedback on coaching style, or you getting pointers on how not to argue with your wife.

This sounds like a dystopia: either I'm receiving some machine-generated feedback that no one checked and may as well not apply at all or someone did check and my entire life is being judged by strangers. In either case, I imagine myself yelling at my SO because they cheated on me and getting a notification that my behavior was out of line.

To me this sounds eerily similar to that quote "you'll own nothing and you'll be happy" in that it's not coming as positive a statement as intended.

> tech is neutral

This statement has the same level of wisdom as telling a judge "Hey man, it's just a plant" at your hearing for dealing cannabis in the US in the 90s. You may be right, but that's independent of the reason we're all here right now.

"Tech" requires an entire grotesque machine of money and monsters, and they are rarely neutral.

If you believed "tech is neutral" you'd advocate for all of this machinery to be heavily regulated, publicly run, publicly owned, and universally accessible, rather than advocating to hide it behind one of the most secretive institutions in the US being led on the leash by oligarchs.

So, you're either one of these oligarchs or brainwashed by one.

> we need a social chnage to make serving someone ads based on their observable behaviour about the same level of social acceptability as crapping on their doorstep

Every time. Every ?!%@# time on HN. "Here's a story about police state overreach and unconstitutional privacy violation. And that's obviously very bad. Now let me tell you how the really important thing here is how much Google sucks."

I would be genuinely shocked if this isn’t already integrated into the US intelligence apparatus, it just may not be commonly used for domestic cases targeting US citizens, or it currently requires parallel construction to justify how they know things they shouldn’t know. This may just be a way to legalize it or integrate a few new data sources.

"Ownership" of data may have little or nothing to do with control of the data, depending on what other rights you agree to give up. Your Flock contract may specify your ownership of the data and then in the next sentence release to Flock all or most control of that data (you still own it!).

Yes

https://youtu.be/uB0gr7Fh6lY?is=7osD4zLTz9wJ1hJc

https://youtu.be/vU1-uiUlHTo?is=zmma8mce5k3nyflw

> Maybe having just one euro/asian-style dense city with bike lanes in the US wouldn't be such a bad thing to try out?

What do you call Manhattan? It would count among the ~10 most dense cities proper in the world.

I do find it interesting that the 'small government' and 'individual freedom above all else' types seem hellbent on regulating and restricting the freedoms of things outside of their own experience and taste.

The freedoms they're after also seem to be along the lines of 'don't restrict my ability to scam folks of lesser intellect or education'.

The leopards are to only eat _their_ faces.

Sooner or later you will learn that politics don't exist and 3 letter agencies are immune to oversight.