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

221–230 of 292 posts

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#221

Post by CarlSchmitt »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #77
BrandonMarc wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the Google. Their employees scoffed about working with the Pentagon and dropped the contract, but happily helped China build an authoritarian social-punishment system. Then denied it ... and then more details kept coming out showing Google continued working on it, just more quietly.

Many Googlers have already left Google on ethical grounds, and many more likely will in the near future. There are multiple organized groups of employees trying to enact change internally, but some who previously did that have already recognized that as futile and left, so presumably more will eventually. Google is already an extremely large company, and I think that many are only just now realizing the problems that…

> "Many Googlers have already left Google on ethical grounds, and many more likely will in the near future"

Good riddance...there are too many software devs acting like political activist here...I hope more leave

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#222

Post by everybodyknows »

chc wrote: post #216
another_comment wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it backwards. The Union Tribune is known to shill for the establishment and has been called "not a credible source of information". The San Diego Reader is local, independent and has a good reputation for honesty. Source: I've lived in San Diego for the last 50 years.

The Reader is independent and the UT is corporate-owned, but on the other hand, the Reader is not really much of a news outlet. Its role in the local ecosystem is kind of halfway between PennySaver and Reader's Digest. They're not dishonest, but they're not shelling out for top-notch reporters either.

The Reader doesn't shell out, but it doesn't pressure writers to dumb down their work to 9th-grade reading level either. So it's a haven for work like this:

https://www.sandiegoreader.com/staff/matthew-lickona/ https://www.sandiegoreader.com/staff/don-bauder/

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#223

Post by onion2k »

village-idiot wrote: post #219
komali2 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Microphones are used in a lot of places to figure out and triangulate the location of a gunshot. Apparently, those don't work too well. Spotshotter works in principle, but police departments are getting as low as 50% false positive rates, and can't really do anything if they do get reports of gunshots anyway - they turn up and the shooter is gone. https://www.govtech.com/public-safety/After-Too-Many-Shots-M...

Former Chicago resident here. The spotshotters were a very effective way to determine what neighborhoods you didn’t want to walk through at night.

You'd hope that would lead to more public investment in education and services in those areas to alliviate crime and make them safer, but somehow I doubt that's what happened...

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#224

Post by village-idiot »

onion2k wrote: post #223
village-idiot wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former Chicago resident here. The spotshotters were a very effective way to determine what neighborhoods you didn’t want to walk through at night.

You'd hope that would lead to more public investment in education and services in those areas to alliviate crime and make them safer, but somehow I doubt that's what happened...

We’re still talking about Chicago, right?

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#225

Post by provolone »

bilbo0s wrote: post #108
pugworthy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

To be fair, the people of San Diego voted their government in. So in my view, they got what they deserved. I'm not sitting on a high horse or anything. I mean hey, I'm from Wisconsin. We're literally the nation's corruption measuring stick . But we voted our politicians in, so we deserve what's happening to us. I'm just holding San Diego to the same standard. If you hadn't voted them in, this wouldn't be happening to…

What about those who abstained from voting? The hole in the 'consent of the governed', 'you got what you asked for' mythology is that there is no way to withdraw your consent.

Imagine giving inmates the 'freedom' to vote for their warden. The outcome of such an election would have no bearing on the morality of their imprisonment.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#226

Post by shard972 »

onion2k wrote: post #223
village-idiot wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former Chicago resident here. The spotshotters were a very effective way to determine what neighborhoods you didn’t want to walk through at night.

You'd hope that would lead to more public investment in education and services in those areas to alliviate crime and make them safer, but somehow I doubt that's what happened...

More? At what point will they look at all the money being spent and the blood being spilled and maybe consider investing in public schools doesn't magically get rid of an infestation of gang violence.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#227

Post by suicideRates »

sroussey wrote: post #210

5G and it’s need to remake all the light and utility poles in the city will bring the cameras and microphones. It’s a compelling use case to a government, regardless of privacy implications. Microphones are used in a lot of places to figure out and triangulate the location of a gunshot. Cameras can track cars and people automatically. Not sure what to do about it though. Maybe multisig with community leaders and poli…

I hate being ahead of the curve most of the time, because it really never pays to be anything besides right-on-time, but rigidity like this is going to expose huge suicide rates as people consider just cutting to the chase on a future that seems cut out for them.

We're already trending close to Japan. It'll be worse than South Korea for sure.

And mind you, the current opioid epidemic's death rate doesn't directly factor into the suicide rate, but it's pretty much an elective analog for alternative euthanasia.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#228

Post by everybodyknows »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #212
sphinxpy wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

Serious question, natural rights aside, is this actually a violation of basic rights in a legal sense (laws, constitutions, etc)?

See section 632(b) of California Penal Code:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xh....

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#229

Post by raxxorrax »

sroussey wrote: post #210

5G and it’s need to remake all the light and utility poles in the city will bring the cameras and microphones. It’s a compelling use case to a government, regardless of privacy implications. Microphones are used in a lot of places to figure out and triangulate the location of a gunshot. Cameras can track cars and people automatically. Not sure what to do about it though. Maybe multisig with community leaders and poli…

> Not sure what to do about it though.

If my city ever decided to implement surveillance on that scale, vandalism is clearly on the table. Just try to sabotage the network first. Would help you not get caught, at least for a while.

In essence: Increase the rate of criminality. They were asking for it.

Re: San Diego Implemented City-Wide Streetlight Surveillance

#230

Post by [deleted] »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #212
sphinxpy wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

Serious question, natural rights aside, is this actually a violation of basic rights in a legal sense (laws, constitutions, etc)?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN