|
| ▲ | Eddy_Viscosity2 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| If the constitutional aspects are settled in favor of people, but current SCOTUS suggests this be unlikely. But.. even it were, then police departments would just buy the data second hand instead via direct contracts. |
| |
| ▲ | bigbuppo 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Flock has already made their billions. They'll pivot to something else, probably budget gunshot tracking cameras that also accidentally eavesdrops on all conversations near by and sends it to the cloud for analysis. | |
| ▲ | joering2 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > but current SCOTUS suggests this be unlikely Are you referring to "temporary inconvenience" or some other decision I'm not aware of? The phrase "temporary inconvenience" refers to a statement by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in his September 2025 concurrence in [Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo]. Defending an order allowing immigration enforcement stops based partly on apparent ethnicity or workplace, Kavanaugh wrote that questioning of legal residents or U.S. citizens would be "typically brief" and a minor inconvenience. | | |
| ▲ | Eddy_Viscosity2 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm referring to the pattern of SCOTUS making up whatever justification they want to achieve the result they want. That and the pattern of being pro-corporation. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | downrightmike 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| well, tax payers. Cops wanted millions extra to hire more cops, and they blow it on start ups instead. |
| |
