| ▲ | EA-3167 an hour ago |
| This is one of those emotionally satisfying stories... if you don't think about it very hard. It's symbolically rich, it fits the simplistic narratives of good vs evil we're all raised with, but this isn't a great example of a 'gotcha' moment. Do I like Flock cameras? No. Do I like mass surveillance? No. Do I see a difference between an agent of the state doing something involving law enforcement or surveillance activities, and a private individual doing the same? Yes. You can't run around in uniform handcuffing people either. I don't want HN'ers setting up surveillance networks anymore than I want them strapping a pistol to their hip and fighting crime. It's an asymmetry by design because the alternative is an unworkable nightmare, whereas the sad reality is that if people keep voting for people who openly spy on us, they're going to keep doing it. |
|
| ▲ | jdejean an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| Your “private individual” wording is carrying a lot of weight here. I wonder if Google knows where all the cops with Androids are? Or if Meta lets you bid for ad impressions from users “interested in law enforcement” What if I wanted to record the cops to schedule my lemonade stand? Basically, the answer to “Who gets to surveil?” is: Everyone but you |
| |
| ▲ | EA-3167 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Start a site or a place where you can collect metrics and hand out cookies. Boom you're in the surveillance game. You can buy ad data, you can read census data, if you have the money it's all out there on the market. Hell if you don't have a conscience you can buy black market info. You have to ask if you want more of that until we reach parity with Google and THE POLICE, or if you're reacting out of a sense of fairness that's taught to children. |
|
|
| ▲ | RunSet an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| "You have no expectation of privacy in public, citizen." "Officer, do you have any expectation of privacy in public?" "That's different." |
| |
| ▲ | EA-3167 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Incredibly sometimes things are different because of different circumstances and the laws we've all taken part in constructing (when we bother to organize and vote of course). You're an unregulated, unsupervised, and frankly unknown factor with no real accountability through any realistic chain of command to the results of the democratic process. However far from your imagined ideal, cops are. | | |
| ▲ | maxerickson an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | There's some public interest in noting and publishing observations of police (they appeared to be working while they were being paid, for instance). The same is at least less true for private citizens that are not being accused of a crime. | |
| ▲ | shimman an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why are you assuming that the rest of us are fine with mass surveillance and authoritarianism? Are you a rationalist? | | |
| ▲ | EA-3167 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I'm not assuming that, and if you read up a bit you'd see my views clearly spelled out. Please engage with the topic and not who you imagine I must be for not providing you with enough of an echo of your own views. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ummonk 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That's an argument you could make if police had to obtain warrants to access them. But they do not, at least in the US (things might be different in Canada where this happened, but I doubt it). Instead, they rely on rulings that there is no expectation of privacy in public. By the same principle, it's perfectly valid and legal for a civilian (or group of civilians) to set up an equivalent system to track police. |
| |
| ▲ | EA-3167 36 minutes ago | parent [-] | | As you say this is Canada, so I don't particular care what the situation is in a totally different country where this didn't happen. Even in the US it's not as though "Warrants are for suckers" is just the law of the land, you and I and millions of others have and had the chance to weigh in on that. The fact that most people don't notice or care does make that sort of thing extremely difficult and frustrating, but that's not the same as it being futile or equivalent to "Guy sets up surveillance network to make a point and get media attention." |
|
|
| ▲ | phyzome 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I mean, the entire point of this project was to make a statement about mass surveillance and make the government feel uncomfortable about it. You don't actually have to worry about "HN'ers setting up surveillance networks". |
| |
| ▲ | EA-3167 34 minutes ago | parent [-] | | It's funny that you say that, because in fact if you look at the companies YC has ultimately birthed, the people that come through here... that's exactly what HN'ers have done. For ad-tech, for fun, for metrics, for AI companies, for the government and contractors. Who do you think does all of this if not a bunch of people in the world of tech who mostly act as mercenaries? |
|
|
| ▲ | ImPostingOnHN 44 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > I don't want HN'ers setting up surveillance networks anymore than I want them strapping a pistol to their hip and fighting crime. In exactly equal measure: I don't want cops setting up surveillance networks any more than I want HN'ers doing it (less so, actually). So this post, bringing attention to that issue, is good, imo. As long as random joe dropout with a badge from boss hogg can do it, and vc-backed visionary mr misanthrope can do it, so can the rest of the people. Cops and corps are only special to the degree that We The People want them to be. And speaking for the plurality of We The People [0]: we do not want them to be special in this way. 0 – https://www.reuters.com/world/us/who-likes-flock-ai-cameras-... |
| |
| ▲ | EA-3167 38 minutes ago | parent [-] | | "Raising awareness" is a scam, especially in this context on this site. Not a single person here is unaware of surveillance as a topic, that's no a serious idea. Again a simplistic model that "If A can do B, B can do A" is how children see the world. Different roles comes with different levels of accountability and oversight. Arguing for more or different oversight? Arguing to vote against mass surveillance measures and the politicians who support them? Organizing as a community? ALL GOOD. Stunts for attention so that libertarians on HN can get a smugrection? Nah. | | |
| ▲ | ImPostingOnHN 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > a scam > no a serious idea > a simplistic model > how children see the world > stunts for attention Your reply is mostly insults and shallow dismissals, so I don't see any reason to meaningfully respond to those parts. I'll check back later to see if you've edited insults out and substance in. As for your separate ideas of community organization: good on you for spearheading that. The world could use more yous doing that, too. If there are any specific asks you have of the community to help you there, HN is full of capable folks. | | |
|
|
