101–110 of 315 posts
> “Obviously, there are laws to protect people’s privacy and we are respectful of all those laws,” Hartman said. “We also understand the importance of operating in an ethical way as it relates to further protecting people’s privacy.” Sure /s
They understand the importance of operating ethically. They didn't say that they do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Given that Hollywood profits are at a two decade low[1], it’s not clear that’s true. [1] https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/why-hollywood-as-we-...
Hollywood is a cred game. The actual money since the 1950s has been on television. In fact Hollywood has never been as profitable, inflation adjusted, as it was before the commodification of television sets.
Source: I study history of film. To think of Hollywood in the 20s, 30s and 40s - think of Silicon Valley. Entire cities were made in huge lots behind LA studios. Nobody does that anymore. Gone with the wind, inflation adjusted, is still one of the most expensive and profitable movies ever made.
And yes, trust me - as far as they know (and a lot of things have been tried) Hollywood makes what it makes because it sells. It’s an industry like any other. Instead of cars they sell movies.
I 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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
"How the CIA Hoodwinked Hollywood
Since its inception, the agency has wooed filmmakers, producers, and actors in order to present a rosy portrait of its operations to the American public."
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/07/op...
I am not advocating this in the US or anywhere, but how would one disable a surveillance balloon as an act of civil disobedience if necessary (without ending up in jail)?
At what point do we just start a non violent movement of taping over cameras wherever we see them?
They're purposefully non-destructive and I've even made the effort to select a sticker type where the adhesive doesn't leave a residue when peeled off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's naive to expect a showdown between the FAA and the Pentagon, doubly so one where the FAA wins.
You missed the point. The FAA will allow government surveillance but not criminal orgs.