| ▲ | arcanemachiner 2 days ago |
| [flagged] |
|
| ▲ | nomel 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| It's fundamentally a security camera, for many people. People buy them to see what's going on, record crimes for reporting, and to feel safer. I think there's significant overlap in people who want to feel safer and people being ok with the police being able to look through their cameras, since being able to record events, for the police, was part of the motivation for the purchase of a security camera. My frail elderly grandpa, who has seen his neighborhood go to shit with the reduced police funding, would definitely see this as a "nice feature". |
|
| ▲ | indiangenz 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I, a law abiding & legal citizen want more of these cameras in public places. Are you trying to achieve an utopia for criminals and illegal aliens? |
| |
| ▲ | kjkjadksj 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Would be nice if the cameras were useful. Most you get is a nice souvenir showing the crime occurring. Recording is not prevention. People don’t even bother hiding their face when they porch pirate in front of an obvious Ring camera because they know there is no real risk. | |
| ▲ | foltik 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Does anyone hear that sound? |
|
|
| ▲ | carlivar 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Have you read "Brave New World"? It predicted the future better than "1984". |
|
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Many of them have been. |
|
| ▲ | nullc 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| IANAL, but if you are to take action it might be most prudent to do so non-destructively. Putting a bag over the camera/solar panel or taking it down and returning the lost/abandoned property would leave it disabled just as well. The added damage of outright destroying it would make no real difference to the company (might even just make them more money) but would make it easier to characterize the action as criminally motivated rather than an act of conscience in the public interest. |
|
| ▲ | seattle_spring 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Every time they're discussed, I think of that scene of Homer bashing a weather station in the 70s[1] [1] https://youtu.be/zexJJb9Lbas |
|
| ▲ | renewiltord 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | rexpop 2 days ago | parent [-] | | OP is not a king. | | |
| ▲ | renewiltord 2 days ago | parent [-] | | I didn’t say anyone was a king. I was just talking about troublesome priests. | | |
| ▲ | saghm 2 days ago | parent [-] | | And you're conveniently unaware of the historical context of the origin of that phrase too, if we're to take you literally, since you seem to entirely misunderstand how the whole reason it was problematic was due to the inherent power dynamics | | |
| ▲ | diordiderot 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Read some Foucauld. power is internalised. People absorb the norms of their social class and start policing themselves and others without needing orders or hierarchical power dynamics. Norm enforcement can spread faster and further than formal authority because lots of people can act on a signal whilst thinking they drew their own conclusions. Think of steve bannon's quote "politics is downstream of culture". formal rank of the speaker is less important than that the signal comes from the socially legitimate tribe whose approval, language, and standard the subject is a member. | | |
| ▲ | saghm 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > Think of steve bannon's quote "politics is downstream of culture". I'm going to be honest: if you think Steve Bannon is a thought leader, I don't think we'd agree on pretty much anything. > formal rank of the speaker is less important than that the signal comes from the socially legitimate tribe whose approval, language, and standard the subject is a member. You're claiming that a random stranger on an internet forum has as much social power as the literal monarch of a country. That's absurd, no matter how much fancy language you use to try to justify it. |
| |
| ▲ | renewiltord 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Indeed, one of the great wisdoms of history is that a mobs have no power. We are very wise men so we know that there are no peer reviewed controlled trials showing mobs having power. We call this thing Science. | | |
| ▲ | saghm 2 days ago | parent [-] | | A random person on an internet forum is not a mob. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
