Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

massprivatei.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 292 posts

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#91

Post by mark212 »

Terr_ wrote: post #42
mark212 wrote: post #21

This blog post is highly misleading and inaccurate. Access to the video is very limited and subject to strict protocols for use in investigations. And the audio recording capacity isn’t live because the City has no use for it. The SD Reader isn’t a very trustworthy source. Here’s the U-T’s extensive piece on the topic: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversatio...

> strict protocols Much like discussions about corporate policies, I find it helps to ask what happens when the handbook isn't followed... How many years in prison does someone get for unauthorized access or (if an authorized user) abusing their access for improper use?

It’s classified the same as other confidential information. There was a senior detective fired because she mishandled the same class of info on a case, so yeah there are serious consequences for breaking these rules. It’s not at all like corporate policies.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#92

Post by slg »

opportune wrote: post #69
slg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is crazy to suggest we should focus more on stopping the next Nazis rather than preemptively stopping the Polish census workers?

Who you think the "next Nazis" are is debatable. I think it's easier to just prevent the situation happening altogether. We don't need arbitrarily powerful surveillance to function as a society

>Who you think the "next Nazis" are is debatable.

It really don't think there is when it gets to "Nazi" level bad. But that isn't really a debate worth having.

>I think it's easier to just prevent the situation happening altogether.

Why is surveillance the line you are drawing? We are all fucked if the US government goes the route of the Nazis. Having the ability to tap into some extra municipal surveillance cameras isn't going to make or brake their control.

>We don't need arbitrarily powerful surveillance to function as a society

Sure, but no one is yet proposing arbitrarily powerful surveillance. You are going slippery slope here. Low level surveillance has value just like the Polish government having an accurate picture of their citizenry has value. The question is whether the present value of the information is outweighed by the remote possibility that the information can be abused by a corrupt power. That remote possibility alone shouldn't be the deciding factor or else we should be against any form of governmental power including having a military any more powerful than a local militia.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#93

Post by mark212 »

sphinxpy wrote: post #74
stevejb wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes exactly this. The "trust us, we are very careful with this ability to spy on you" should be taken with a grain of salt.

Every person in these towns that have this violation of basic rights, should be demanding the takedown immediately but they won't. Again and again the people of this country fall for the "trust us. We are her to help you." lie that our government sells. If they do care, many people are in a state of disagreement and division so much that they won't work together out of spite if it means working with another ideology.…

Great point: let’s have an honest and fact-based discussion. This blog post isn’t that. Turn up at a council meeting and tell the elected politicians that you don’t want to be spied on. Make the police defend their use of the footage. Convince others to agree with you. That’s democracy and at this level of government it works pretty well.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#94

Post by gotu »

maxxxxx wrote: post #41

It's just a matter of time until we have country-wide full surveillance. It will be the perfect tool for anyone who wants to create a dictatorship. The thought police and the telescreens in 1984 will look primitive and weak in comparison. I think there is no way around it. Add to that drones to keep the population under control and there is huge danger we'll have a pretty bleak future.

"Country-wide full surveillance"? Maybe we have it already, but just don't know it yet. Search for "Gorgon Stare".

It's featured in a new book called "Eyes in the Sky", and is said to have been used secretly over several cities in the US.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#95

Post by maxxxxx »

nostrademons wrote: post #79
maxxxxx wrote: post #41

It's just a matter of time until we have country-wide full surveillance. It will be the perfect tool for anyone who wants to create a dictatorship. The thought police and the telescreens in 1984 will look primitive and weak in comparison. I think there is no way around it. Add to that drones to keep the population under control and there is huge danger we'll have a pretty bleak future.

There's probably too many security holes inherent in modern technology to get that sort of one-party equilibrium. You'll have the governments who paid for the surveillance tech, the companies that installed backdoors in products they manufactured, the suppliers that installed backdoors in the components of those products, rival nation states, various hacker collectives, and the criminals they sold exploits to all joc…

Sounds like life won't be pretty for the citizens who are caught in this.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#96

Post by mark212 »

blackflame7000 wrote: post #16

I live in San Diego and frankly, I hate the new lights because they simply aren't as bright and there are fewer of them. I can't run outside after work during the winter because the streets are dark now.

I think there’s a statewide standard now on light pollution that mandates dimmer lights. Supposed to be safer, too, because the contrast with the shadows isn’t so great.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#97

Post by midniteslayr »

mark212 wrote: post #85
lysium wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has an impact on your behavior in public no matter if the camera is on or off, because you cannot be sure.

Not to sound moralistic but if yiu wouldn’t do it while being recorded, why would you do it in public at all?

It isn't about the content in which someone is recorded. It's about having consent to have someone record you.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#98

Post by HashThis »

panic wrote: post #51
maxxxxx wrote: post #41

It's just a matter of time until we have country-wide full surveillance. It will be the perfect tool for anyone who wants to create a dictatorship. The thought police and the telescreens in 1984 will look primitive and weak in comparison. I think there is no way around it. Add to that drones to keep the population under control and there is huge danger we'll have a pretty bleak future.

This sort of defeatism isn't helpful. Surveillance technology doesn't sprout up from nothingness; it's built on a culture and a political/economic environment which can be changed.

US Congress doesn't represent US citizens. 84% of the time, the congress person that wins in that district raised the most money. Corporations and the wealthy provide that money to get congress people who represent THEM, not US citizens.

US Congress doesn't represent US citizens. So nothing changes if moneyed interests want US citizens to live under surveillance.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#99

Post by rrix2 »

pugworthy wrote: post #36
unstatusthequo wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until they arrest and fine you for damaging government property... The way to fight this is with votes or in courts, which may not be effective in short term but doesn’t land you in jail.

Neither votes nor courts enabled this - governments just did it, and will just do things like this without asking (nor sometimes checking). The challenge in a way is how can we ever vote for or fight against (in court) things we don't even know exist sometimes?

Present legislation for public surveillance accountability (or vote for people who will) like Seattle did https://www.seattle.gov/tech/initiatives/privacy/surveillanc...

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#100

Post by _underfl0w_ »

mark212 wrote: post #86
kelnos wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I frankly do not care how limited access is, or if parts of the hardware are disabled. I do not trust governments to act transparently. There are a few telling things in the article you link to that make it clear that the government values expediency over protecting citizens' rights. The first notable one is the process: a police officer has to submit a request to view video records... but to whom? It looks like just…

“Too tantalizing to public officials”? Please explain. The city is run by nine elected members of the council. For what possible purpose would they wish to have audio recordings of street traffic?

That's a straw man.

This is clearly not about recording audio of vehicle traffic, but about recording conversations between the same citizens they're visually monitoring.

Plus, they were very quick to pull the trigger and install these without asking. Clearly asking people who would do such a thing to "exercise self control" in regard to enabling yet another degree of surveillance seems like an exercise in futility.

Post reply on HN