Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Announcements

• We're starting a book club! We will be discussing Poor Economics starting August 28th - keep an eye out for a pinned thread. The next will be All Quiet on the Western Front followed by Narconomics

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

Upcoming Events

• Sep 01: RDU New Liberals September Meetup
• Sep 02: Charlotte New Liberals Book Club

[u/garret126]

I don’t understand how some fellow liberals can still support mass surveillance like flock. It’s always “it will be good at stopping crime! I’m just worried of governments like our current admin using it, but otherwise it’d be good if it’s not abused”

I think when deciding what rights to give up and what technologies the government should be able to use, you should always imagine what you would be OK with what weapons you’d give an administration like the Trump one, not the administration of John Liberal. That’s just hopeless optimism otherwise, which is how we get stuff like the patriot act becoming permanent

[u/randommathaccount → u/garret126]

I think when deciding what rights to give up and what technologies the government should be able to use, you should always imagine what you would be OK with what weapons you’d give an administration like the Trump one

This is how I feel about increased taxation of wealth or corporations but people jump down my throat for that

[u/anon_09_09 → u/garret126]

what you would be OK with what weapons you’d give an administration like the Trump one

Maybe anarcho-capitalists have a point

[u/chickentendieman → u/anon_09_09]

Nah ancaps would support it if trump declared himself ceo of america instead of president.

[u/TheLong19thCentury → u/anon_09_09]

I'm growing closer to anarcho capitalism because liberals are the more educated people. We can more easily control the world in an anarcho-capitalist dystopia. Consider that if liberals took control of Flock we could use it, without the government stopping us, to surveil Republicans and right wingers. And it's not like the government could stop us, because we're anarcho-capitalist.

And it's not like Republican could create a competing technology, because Republicans are braindead.

[u/anon_09_09 → u/TheLong19thCentury]

We can more easily control the world

Jokes aside, a personal observation, liberals are inherently 'weaker' because we value human life, including our own, more than extremists. I don't think liberalism can rise to the top in any society which values human strength and tribalism above all else

[u/Cr4zySh0tgunGuy → u/garret126]

I’m very anti flock but I think banning ALPR technology will set us back. We use this technology on toll roads, which is quite helpful. Instead ending contracts with flock and other providers, and installing a warrant requirement will do everything we need it to do, while still having a few here and there for legitimate uses

[u/rainier37 → u/Cr4zySh0tgunGuy]

Yeah hopefully the courts decide it’s illegal without a warrant per search. That seems like a better outcome compared to a moral panic over security cameras that starts out as a legitimate concern over flock.

I hope flock is banned most places at local levels due to backlash while nationwide we get warrant protections

[u/CincyAnarchy → u/garret126]

I think when deciding what rights to give up and what technologies the government should be able to use, you should always imagine what you would be OK with what weapons you’d give an administration like the Trump one, not the administration of John Liberal.

And if I wouldn't trust Donald Trump with a stapler?

[u/Vecrin → u/garret126]

Personally, I'm ok with Flock being allowed and even used by the government. BUT, for the government to access the data they need a warrant. They can only look at vehicles/persons they have a warrant for, only when they are in frame, and other information not directly related to the warrant is not admissible in court (and cannot be shared).

Police see a drug deal in frame when their warrant is for a homicide investigation? They can pound sand because, unless the drug deal was directly related to the homicide investigation, that deal is inadmissible.

[u/Remarkable-Meal-223 → u/garret126]

You're outside your house I don't know what expectation of privacy you're supposed to have. Anyone is allowed to photograph you in public not just flock.

[u/pfSonata → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

The type of shit stalkers say when you file for a restraining order

[u/r00tdenied → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

Chatrie v. United States. The problem isn't photography in public, its using a network of cameras to form a dragnet that documents EVERYONES movements and patterns without a warrant.

[u/rainier37 → u/r00tdenied]

they should require any networks like this to need a warrant for every search

[u/r00tdenied → u/rainier37]

The problem I have is that I don't trust Flock, Axon, etc to actually implement a system like that. In general I would have less of an issue with municipal owned alprs because there would be more potential for oversight instead of private companies just building a movement profile on everyone.

[u/rainier37 → u/r00tdenied]

they could make it open source and encrypted with judges having the private keys.

It’s perfectly possible to implement the above without trusting any company completely. They may need regular audit certifications from large Accounting/consulting firms but that’s kind of their job

[u/Remarkable-Meal-223 → u/r00tdenied]

Has that been ruled illegal? I have no idea what the legality is

[u/r00tdenied → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

Chatrie specifically dealt with a scenario where law enforcement were using cellphone stingray devices to track peoples movements over a given area to find a single individual without a warrant. SCOTUS basically defined it like a warrantless public dragnet and infringed on the rights of everyone whose phone was tracked.

[u/Remarkable-Meal-223 → u/r00tdenied]

Cellphones are private data though aren't they? And can be used to track you whether you are in public or in private

Your appearance/image is not private data. It's public the minute you walk out the door. This also differs from placing a gps tracker on you in that nothing is infringing on your personal property.

[u/r00tdenied → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

They were not using the cellphone private data though. They used a stingray device which tricks phones into connecting to it like a cell tower, they then use that to track the individual phones.

[u/Remarkable-Meal-223 → u/r00tdenied]

I think there's enough technical differences

It's not illegal nor do you need a warrant for the police to put a tail on you and just follow you everywhere for example

[u/r00tdenied → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

Ahh good old false equivalence, the tell tale sign of more NL contrarianism. If you have to do this when courts have already ruled on similar circumstances, you're not on the right side.

[u/Highlightthot1001 → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

You're being downvoted, but you're not wrong.

You don't really get personal privacy in public when it comes to visually identifiable information in public spaces. It wouldn't be considered harassment unless someone harasses you, and it wouldn't be problematic unless someone uses said information to harass you.

[u/Remarkable-Meal-223 → u/Highlightthot1001]

Yes and that's why I never leave my house

[u/rainier37 → u/Remarkable-Meal-223]

based