Somehow I didn't think that it was OK for the US military to operate domestically. According to the Posse Comitatus Act.
But I see that there's an exception for surveillance.
Charming.
Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
71–80 of 315 posts
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that people haven't commented "this is bad" doesn't mean lots of people don't think it's bad. But such comments don't change anything, and the site guidelines specifically discourage them because they just add noise. Insulting people, however, tends to derail any useful discussion.
> Insulting people, however, tends to derail any useful discussion. She didn't insult anyone, please explain how you got that from the text of the comment. Most likely HN users are fearful of retaliation from the mods for participating in a discussion that will likely be deemed "political" or a "flame war". I suggest you not reply to this or else your account might get shadow banned. YC is heavily invested in Palanti…
> You all deserve the tyranny that is coming.
That's the bit that feels insulting. I don't want this mass surveillance, but I also don't really have anything at the top level to comment about it that hasn't been hashed and rehashed.
> so it's reasonable that the mods try not to let content exist that might agitate investors.
Having read the discussions, I feel like there are often many commentators — and articles — that point out and criticize the surveillance state, to the extent that if there is censoring being attempted, it's not really very good.
I'm not sure everyone who reads here is convinced, so maybe, IDK, it is still worthwhile to try to change some minds. I do feel like I see back and forth to bad arguments like "But I have nothing to hide!", so I don't think everyone here is on the same page, though HN is orders of magnitude more aware of it than the public. If we are ever to effect real change, either we need to convince the public that this matters and that they should care or maybe the ACLU/EFF can pull something off for us. (So, you know, donate to them if you believe they would help do good.)
Tech stuff often gets lost though behind other issues like gay rights, abortion, climate change, guns&terrorism. (Which, honestly, might be more important, so can we please get those settled and move on to the tech stuff maybe?)
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#73At what point do we just start a non violent movement of taping over cameras wherever we see them?
I already do this with the cameras that are in an increasing number of airplane seat backs.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#74> The new balloons promise a cheap surveillance platform that could follow multiple cars and boats for extended periods. And because winds often travel in different directions at different altitudes, the balloons can usually hover over a given area simply by ascending or descending. Stepping back from the details of this story reveals a striking pattern that most public discussions on mass surveillance miss entirely.…
I’ve maintained for a long time that the only reason we have a “war on terror” is that the ability of the “war on drugs” to strip us of our civil liberties had mostly run its course by 2001. These are the political issues I care most about. I really hoped Obama would curtail the surveillance state. For 8 years I thought “soon, he will try to rollback the patriot act.” That never happened. Instead, we got assisinated…
> Hollywood leans strongly toward lionizing rogue cops/gestapo agents who trample civil rights.
Hollywood, like Legislatures, are giving the majority of the public what they want.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#75At what point do we just start a non violent movement of taping over cameras wherever we see them?
I already do this with the cameras that are in an increasing number of airplane seat backs.
Oh, charming: airplanes now have cameras installed against the will of the airlines operating the planes.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3022742002
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#76To those that are profound, the US has mass surveillance since the first satellite with camera was in orbit
The new balloon cameras have much higher resolution.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#77There's a bit of scaremongering in the headline; these are being tested domestically by the DOD use outside of the US. The DOD isn't allowed to conduct domestic surveillance.
The FBI and state governments are allowed to conduct domesticated surveillance, and they inherit military tech.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#78I don't comment much, but I feel compelled to mention how this currently has a 36:1 vote-to-comment ratio. The kinds of thing the US military is testing on their own people is horrific, and it's our duty as American citizens to oppose this kind of surveillance. I sometimes feel I'm talking to a ghost. It is truly terrifying that my fellow Americans are selling themselves out. Ring will let the government, Amazon, and…
lol, suggesting that people are worthy of tyranny based on comment ratios is about as quintessential HN filter-bubble as I can imagine. Comment ratios mean absolutely nothing, especially a single cherry-picked example in a swamp of front-page posts.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#79> The new balloons promise a cheap surveillance platform that could follow multiple cars and boats for extended periods. And because winds often travel in different directions at different altitudes, the balloons can usually hover over a given area simply by ascending or descending. Stepping back from the details of this story reveals a striking pattern that most public discussions on mass surveillance miss entirely.…
> government, law enforcement The thing is when it gets cheap enough, other players start enter the game too. Companies. Criminal gangs. Or even private individuals. A situation of "if surveillance is outlawed, only outlaws will have surveillance" should be taken into account.
Not really. The FAA might have something to say about what floats around the sky. At least in the USA.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#80I saw a BBC short video while in Europe last summer. It was surreal. The video was basically showing how awesome these aerial surveillance platforms were. At one point the reporter walked out of the control center and started dancing outside. It looked like he was having a lot of fun watching himself from a few thousand feet up. If anyone manages to find it please post it. There was no talk about the privacy implicat…
Hey the good news for us is the ones in the US don't have self-guided missiles attached, right?