Thread

1. joshheitzman · 1791066694 · focus · HN ↗

   Yes, that's what they are. But does that mean are they breaking federal law or unconstitutional? I believe we've been told by the courts repeatedly that we should have no expectation of privacy out in public.

   1. rglover · 1791068242 · focus · HN ↗

      > But does that mean are they breaking federal law or unconstitutional?

      I'd argue they break the fourth amendment:

      > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

      What are "unreasonable searches" if not being under "indiscriminate mass surveillance?"

      1. charcircuit · 1791069049 · focus · HN ↗

         >What are "unreasonable searches" if not being under "indiscriminate mass surveillance?"

         A police officer randomly entering your house and going through all of your belongings.

         Indiscriminately searching a larger number of people is not necessarily unreasonable. Take for example the TSA at airports where you have to searched to enter and the airpots have a ton of cameras recording every single person there.

         1. kennywinker · 1791070449 · focus · HN ↗

            Frankly, the TSAs security theater should not be taken as an example of reasonable gov behaviour.

            1. Quekid5 · 1791071001 · focus · HN ↗

               TBF they are quite good at finding water/shampoo containers.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.