Hidden Microphones Part of Government Surveillance Program in the Bay Area

Post by mattnewton » Sun, May 15, 2016, 10:13 PM UTC

rms_returns wrote: post #259

maxxxxx wrote: post #2

If that's true we are moving into a scary world pretty much like 1984 where everything you do is monitored all the time. Add voice, face recognition, surveillance drones, cheap data storage and AI to the mix it seems pretty soon everything you do in a public place will be recorded and analyzed. And all this can be done fully automated. I hope people will recognize that some laws need to change. Surveillance makes sen…

Yeah, with that kind of advancement in technology, the "Captain America vs Iron Man" debate is going to be sprung soon. In other words, the debate between Individual Freedom vs Individual Safety.

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, May 16, 2016, 12:00 AM UTC

bigiain wrote: post #92

dragonwriter wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it will make hit and runs easier to get away with. It won't make liability insurance worse, but it will make coverage that pays for damages in those cases much more expensive.

I wonder what percentage of hit and runs get a license plate number, and what percentage of the ones that _do_ get an id eventually end up with the insurance company in question recovering costs from the at-fault driver? My gut feel? The number of hit and runs and the insurance company costs is likely to be a very small part of the costs of running an insurance company, and that the rate of recovery from the identifi…

Post by aidenn0 » Mon, May 16, 2016, 4:30 AM UTC

justifier wrote: post #137

aidenn0 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many cases federal law trumps state law. State law is likely to not be allowed to hinder a federal investigation. Typically the FBI isn't allowed to record conversations it isn't a party to without a warrant if you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. They are likely going to argue that there is no such expectation of privacy at a public bus stop.

> As the California Supreme Court made clear, federal law (which permits monitoring with the consent of one party) does not preempt more restrictive state eavesdropping laws, even when the monitored communications are interstate. Accordingly, companies that monitor interstate calls for quality control purposes must consult the applicable provisions of state, as well as federal, law. (o) i feel another commenter, em3r…

Post by fangzhzh » Mon, May 16, 2016, 5:21 AM UTC

pjlegato wrote: post #275

onion2k wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "permanent" in the sense of "until the state collapses and the government, and the nation, ceases to exist" is a fair use of the word.

It's not accurate. "Permanent" means "something that lasts forever," not "something that lasts for a while, until it stops existing."

Post by askldfhjkasfhd » Mon, May 16, 2016, 7:00 PM UTC

woodman wrote: post #268

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your characterization of liberal and conservative is inaccurate. First, there is no central summary of what the views are for these groups. Liberals are okay with private activities that don't hurt anyone, so they are okay with sexual activities. They think people own their own bodies, so they are okay with taking drugs like pot that don't hurt anyone; harder to say where the line goes with harder drugs. Burn…

> I think your characterization of liberal and conservative is inaccurate. That can go without saying - did you really think that I was trying to comprehensively describe such complexity in less than a dozen sentences? I think your characterization certainly adds more color, but you go wrong with "they want to base their actions off of facts". It would be more accurate, and succinct, to say "they are utilitarian". Th…