Thread

1. JKCalhoun · 1791067032 · focus · HN ↗

   License plate reader?

   So the device should require very specific license plates to scan for—not the current dragnet. The software should only "ping" when there is a confident match with said license plate(s)—and merely log which license plate, time stamp a single photo, and note the confidence level of it being a match.

   The frame buffer should be the only place (a frame of) video is ever stored at all (excepting the high-confidence match indicated above).

   The only issue remaining would be whether we trust the device/software to have complied (and not have a backdoor) and of course there needs to be a legal warrant for every license plate uploaded (and it should expire fairly frequently, likely requiring a new warrant to continue canning for the plate).

   1. JumpCrisscross · 1791071022 · focus · HN ↗

      > the device should require very specific license plates to scan for

      I’d be okay with a 24-hour on device store of scanned plates. That way a stolen car can be tracked ex post facto.

      1. sneak · 1791071124 · focus · HN ↗

         These machines are online 24/7. There is no technical difference to storing it in the device flash or the Flock sql database.

         1. Barbing · 1791072200 · focus · HN ↗

            I want them offline. Plug in physically to download what’s needed. Or park in closest safe location. Either way, create a log with access + warrant. No warrant, no access (or legal penalties when logs are reviewed, if warrant can’t be a precondition on a technical level).

            A cop with a cable to a camera pole would be a visible sign to the community that something happened. If someone’s there every day, maybe it’s one of those (rare but…) losers tracking his abused former lover. (Super sick that cop helped his cousin do this.)

            1. schrodinger · 1791072681 · focus · HN ↗

               I agree — but in practice, once data exists, it tends to become streamed, stored, indexed, searchable, and immortal. It’s the nature of data to want to be free which cuts both ways good and bad, and is why sometimes the only way to have privacy and freedom is to not record in the first place, unfortunately.

               This is why anonymity is necessary for true freedom and privacy. If data _can_ be traced and connected, it will be. This aligns with a 1995 Supreme Court opinion (McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission), where Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that "anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority," noting that it "exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation... at the hand of an intolerant society."

               1. Barbing · 1791073056 · focus · HN ↗

                  I’m OK if lack of a panopticon means a relative’s murderer gets away (“…give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety…”) but hoped I could eat my cake & have it… good thinker for me

                  Govt. fund a new division of the EFF to address your concerns w/the new offline camera scheme? Unlike acceptable encryption backdoors, it seems possible. Somehow.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.