9 comments

  • majorchord 1 hour ago
    SCOTUS has already ruled that tracking people's movement over time without a warrant is a Fourth Amendment violation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenter_v._United_States

    • avidiax 1 hour ago
      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

    • roughly 1 hour ago
      Unfortunately, “SCOTUS previously declared this unconstitutional” doesn’t have quite the same sense of finality it used to these days.
      • SecretDreams 1 hour ago
        It's really more of just polite suggestion these days, sadly. Except any time they vote against legalized abortion or minority issues. Then the rulings are rigidly enforced.
        • throwaway85825 3 minutes ago
          Legalized abortion needs to be a law, like the democrats promised for decades but never delivered. When the court invents rights then the court can just revoke it. Can't if it's a law.
    • tptacek 46 minutes ago
      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.
      • throwaway85825 2 minutes ago
        Regardless of the legal status if the data exists it will inevitably be misused.
    • kgwxd 1 hour ago
      SCOTUS has already ruled that their rulings mean nothing when Republicans have control.
      • startpage_com 19 minutes ago
        These israeli agents don't care about the false left/right dichotomy. Are you silly?
      • amelius 54 minutes ago
        Republicans are pretty good at hacking, to be honest. Finding loopholes, social engineering, using laws in ways they weren't intended to be used, etc. And they don't even read HN (I suppose). It's all very impressive.
        • rc5150 2 minutes ago
          "And they don't even read HN"

          The amount of Trump and fascist policy dickriding comments I see on this site lead me to think otherwise.

  • tptacek 44 minutes ago
    This article is literally blogspam of an article that got significant front-page coverage:

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48184350

  • roxolotl 2 hours ago
    There’s a lot of local US candidates running this year on pushing back on the federal government. Realistically there’s not a ton that can be done at the level of a mayor or even state senator. However removing local passive surveillance is something that can make a genuine impact. I’d love to see people running on banning red light/license plate cameras and other passive surveillance tools. If the data is never collected it can’t be abused.
    • throwaway5752 1 hour ago
      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.

      • dangus 1 hour ago
        One major example is how Chicago Public Schools has a non-cooperation policy and a policy to refuse warrantless access to school property for ICE agents.

        The school district also refuses to consider immigration status as a prerequisite to enrollment in the school system.

        This is a huge deal since any state or local school district could decide to do the exact opposite.

        This makes nearly every minor inaccessible to immigration enforcement officers during business hours.

        • throwaway5752 1 hour ago
          Absolutely. Run for the HOA board, run for the school board, run for the town council. Write a letter. Show up to a town hall meeting. Everything makes a difference and people here are more than sufficiently qualified.

          We have lots of software developers being laid off. An elected position serves as resume filler, too. You'd be shocked what a difference you can make when you try a little.

      • Forgeties79 1 hour ago
        to add to this, if local governments refuse to install the hardware that the federal government wants to tap into, then there’s nothing for them to tap into.

        It’s a lot harder for the federal government to go around placing all these tools around the country than it is for them to simply vacuum up what is already there.

        If anybody wants to see the power of controlling local government and its upstream impact, look no further than mom’s for liberty and their assault on school boards nationwide.

    • engineer_22 1 hour ago
      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.

    • dangus 1 hour ago
      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.

      • ww520 1 hour ago
        Facial and gait recognition tech make the pedestrian vs car point moot.
      • dgellow 1 hour ago
        Facial recognition has been used in train stations, unfortunately
      • engineer_22 1 hour ago
        Pedestrians are limited to a ~20 mile radius.

        Travelling further, without a car, then requires use of public transportation and by using public transportation depending where you are you have implied consent to being searched "for safety".

        Acknowledging civil asset forfeiture is a problem in some jurisdictions, private automobiles still provide a greater expectation of privacy than public modes of transport.

        • vrganj 1 hour ago
          (E)-Bikes.
        • dangus 1 hour ago
          First I would question why anyone has to drive 20 miles to reach basic needs like grocery stores and employers. Isn’t that already a failure of urban and suburban planning?

          Existing on public transit is not an automatic agreement to be searched as you describe.

          Here’s an attorney website that describes your general rights:

          https://azharillc.com/blog/youre-riding-the-l-train-can-cops...

          There are many more things that are illegal for you to be doing as a driver of a car versus existing in public on public transportation. Many of these things can trigger searching your possessions being legal compared to being a person on public transit.

          You’re also required to present your drivers license and fully identify yourself if you are stopped for minor traffic infractions like a tail light being out.

          As a pedestrian, in most states you do not have to present ID to an officer on the street.

          For example, it’s generally not probable cause to search on public transit if an officer smells alcohol, while in a vehicle it’s basically an automatic search of your whole car. You would also have the issue of what a court or jury thinks of the reasonableness of the search based on the context. If you’re quietly minding your own business on the train and you smell like alcohol is a judge or jury going to think the search was reasonable? Now compare that to a driver in a vehicle smelling like alcohol.

          Furthermore, the whole concept of a DUI checkpoint where every person is stopped and questioned is at the very least impractical and often illegal for pedestrians.

          Thank you for your service as the incorrect carbrain of the day.

          • tocs3 1 hour ago
            First I would question why anyone has to drive 20 miles to reach basic needs like grocery stores and employers. Isn’t that already a failure of urban and suburban planning?

            I live in central TX and until recently it has been fairly rural. It is now very suburban and it is very common to have to drive 20 miles or so for groceries. There are also lots of traffic lights. For most there is almost no practical way to get to any consumer business on foot and no public transport. Twenty years ago it was "living in the country" and travailing for anything was just part of the deal to live here. It is about the same but with the added joys of traffic, less privacy, and higher taxes.

          • ungreased0675 39 minutes ago
            This seems so obvious to me, but maybe it’s not… sometimes I want to go somewhere that’s far away. Last weekend I went to a restaurant that was 90 minutes and two states away. Should I not be allowed to do that? If I want organic oranges, and my local grocery store doesn’t have any, should I just make do?

            Most people don’t live in NYC. Transit and urban planning solutions appropriate for there is supremely unhelpful for most other places.

            • amanaplanacanal 15 minutes ago
              Allowed to? Absolutely! Required to? Terrible urban design.
    • xnx 1 hour ago
      > 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.

  • hsuduebc2 1 hour ago
    I must shamefully admit that after vaguely watching American tv shows like CSI for last twenty years I was convinced this is already a thing for a long time.

    Does it mean you can't see a perfect reflection on a slightly rusted screw?

    • Enginerrrd 1 hour ago
      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.
  • SubiculumCode 1 hour ago
    Are license plates a federal or state requirement?
  • edot 1 hour ago
    Wait, but I was told that my local police department owned the Flock data, and that Flock doesn't own it and cannot share it? Was I lied to, to further expand the surveillance state?
  • hombre_fatal 54 minutes ago
    The "15 minute city conspiracy" (anti bike lane, anti mass transit, car = liberty) people sure seem to gloss over inconvenient facts like this.

    Frankly I don't see a way out from this. Since you must register and insure your vehicle and have a government license to drive it and it hauls two tons at 80mph, it seems like natural creep for the government to know where it is, and the tech to infer it without explicitly scanning plates is only getting better and better.

    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?

    • gottorf 11 minutes ago
      > 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.

  • anadem 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • morgoths_bane 1 hour ago
    I am so glad the party of small government is in charge.
    • BLKNSLVR 1 hour ago
      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.

      • ungreased0675 30 minutes ago
        Great straw man you’ve set up there.