‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Federal judge calls Flock 'indiscriminate mass surveillance'

483 points · 267 comments · sbulaev

  1. JKCalhoun · · 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. kennywinker · · focus · HN ↗
      That is a technical solution to a problem that has a far cheaper, and less easily abused solution: don't put up cameras at all.

      Building a system with "safeguards" in place that require constant oversight is destined for either regulatory capture of the oversight, or slow dismantling of the oversight.

      E.g. warrants -> fisa court warrants -> Xkeyscore

      1. JumpCrisscross · · focus · HN ↗
        > don't put up cameras at all

        There seems to be a real reduction in property crime in some places with cameras. I don’t think it’s realistic to take these down everywhere. (I was in the camp that they should go down everywhere. I’ve relaxed that position recently.)

        1. qurren · · focus · HN ↗
          I can't speak for everyone, but I've lived in countries where there are cameras everywhere, e.g. Singapore, China, where crime is almost zero compared to the US, and it is incredibly safe to be anywhere at almost any hour. Actual criminals are usually caught and apprehended very quickly. That part feels nice, that it is vanishingly unlikely to get mugged just for going out to get food at 2am.

          What can make them suck is authorities abusing them to do enforce arbitrary, unpredictable ideals that are not part of the law, incompetent authorities targeting non-criminals and peaceful protesters, or traumatizing the wrong person because of an incorrect AI face match.

          1. kennywinker · · focus · HN ↗
            > What can make them suck is authorities abusing them to do enforce arbitrary, unpredictable ideals that are not part of the law,

            That’s crime. Doesn’t make it into the stats tho

            1. cucumber3732842 · · focus · HN ↗
              No, it's not a crime. In the US civil/administrative enforcement authorities are given insane authority under the law and "haha, spend $10k on lawyering to exhaust our kangaroo court and then spend another 20 to sue us in big boy court" is your recourse. Your 4th through 8th amendment rights basically don't exist if the subject is one of fines and fees and bureaucrats and not one of gun toting, door kicking cops trying to put you in a cage. And this is the US. I can only imagine what it's like in China.

              Read your municipal code (they're fairly homogenous these days because of the feds and their stupid grants) if you don't believe me.

              1. [deleted] · · focus · HN ↗

                [deleted]

              2. hazbot · · focus · HN ↗
                I think it's fair to say the the parent comment's usage of 'crime' was likely in the informal sense, not in the legal technical sense.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.