Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US • Hacker News Board

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#221

Post by wjn0 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:28 PM UTC

Is anyone else extremely bothered by the false equivalence of narcotics trafficking and the need for homeland security?

This blurring of the lines between a multi-billion dollar _business_ (probably around 1% of the world's GDP) that in fact relies on the success of the state, and purported threats to the state itself strikes me as extremely dangerous.

I'm contrasting this to American intelligence involvement in central America in the 1980s. During that time, the same organizations involved in cocaine trafficking and production were also extremely political, and crucial to the CIA carrying out their (in my opinion neoimperialist) "responsibilities" in the region.

My point is: I am aware of absolutely no evidence that modern drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) operating within the borders of the US are political whatsoever, so can we really view them as a threat to homeland security? Is there evidence that there is some risk of groups which pose a threat to our security have infiltrated these DTOs, or are piggybacking off their operations somehow?

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#222

Post by DanBC » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:33 PM UTC

davesmith1983 wrote: post #203

DanBC wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also the UK has put people in prison for the nebulous crime of "hate speech". Almost all these examples usually given involve campaigns of harassment. And there's nothing nebulous about it: the boundaries are clear and simple.

No not at all. The Chelsea Russell case 17 year old girl on facebook posted rap lyrics, we also have the 'Count Dankula' case which the Scottish court decided it was "Nazi Recruitment" ignoring the context where he clearly said "I am using this to annoy my girlfriend" at the start of the video. I believe there is also a case where some Grime rappers were charged with hate speech for their songs ... this would be the…

Chelsea Russell: not convicted.

Count Dankula: broadcast the phrase "gas the jews", then did not use a freedom of speech argument in court, instead saying "it was just a joke". His "I am using this to annoy my girlfriend" defence failed because there's no evidence she even saw the video, and if he was just doing it to annoy her there was no need to broadcast it to his youtube channel.

> I believe there is also a case where some Grime rappers were charged with hate speech for their songs

It's pretty hard to have this conversation with someone who admits they don't know what they're talking about.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#223

Post by Nec28 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:36 PM UTC

mgamache wrote: post #82

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)?

Using drones could work I guess?

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#224

Post by mgamache » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:39 PM UTC

base698 wrote: post #215

mgamache wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. The FAA might have something to say about what floats around the sky. At least in the USA.

65,000 ft is above their jurisdiction.

is it really? Not doubting, but looking for a reference. The balloon has to get to 65,000 ft. So launches are covered?

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#225

Post by mgamache » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:40 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #110

hueving wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the point. The FAA will allow government surveillance but not criminal orgs.

The GP talked about people entering the surveillance game in general, not necessarily operating their own blimps. Smaller outfits will find ways to game the existing rules and add surveillance capability thereto.

the cameras are all made by Huawei, so they probably get a live feed anyway :)

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#226

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:56 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #217

StavrosK wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But wow, it would be a very different scene. Yeah, it would be a civil war with orders of magnitude more dead. I don't understand the American fascination with guns. When have they ever been useful against the government?

1776, 1789, 1848, 1917, and several smaller ones along the way. The one in 1861 was ultimately not effective.

[deleted]

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#227

Post by mtgx » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 2:00 PM UTC

soulofmischief wrote: post #210

Joeri wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The novelty here is a further reduction in cost by mounting it on balloons, but gorgon stare platforms for total surveillance have been rolled out in cities in the U.S. for several years now with plane-mounted camera arrays. Baltimore’s PD deployed it in secret in 2016 with money from a private donor without even informing the mayor. The cost is rapidly falling to the point of inevitability for government actors and…

> Criminals could observe people and car movements in entire neighborhoods to better target burglaries and carjackings. The genie is pretty much out of the bottle. It can't be understated how much impact this, and drones, will have on home invasion crimes. And they will have surveillance ops on standby to help them successfully navigate out of police chases when the need arises.

And then when people will inevitably start wanting better home security (I'm thinking armored doors and such, not hackable "smart" locks) as a consequence of this, the government will start whining about not being able to break into people's homes as easily when they look for someone.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#228

Post by coldtea » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

bamboozled wrote: post #154

alex_duf wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a french person I don't see that going very well or being very effective. Now our police force (CRS) are just military and dress like robocop for any confrontation. People get hurt, the news outlets take the government side and the problems stays the same.

This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…

>This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away.

It's not like those guns do anything. Americans seldom protest their governments laws, and are conditioned to be living and having passed upon them way worse laws than French (without guns) have...

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#229

Post by coldtea » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #217

StavrosK wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But wow, it would be a very different scene. Yeah, it would be a civil war with orders of magnitude more dead. I don't understand the American fascination with guns. When have they ever been useful against the government?

1776, 1789, 1848, 1917, and several smaller ones along the way. The one in 1861 was ultimately not effective.

So, like a century ago, when the state was 1/10 what it is now?

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#230

Post by coldtea » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 2:06 PM UTC

davesmith1983 wrote: post #196

jgtrosh wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In France we have a contract: if people are unhappy they rise against. If there's no risk of revolting, the fox is fearless in the chicken hen.

How many weeks of protest are in Paris now? It hasn't appeared to change anything.

Be assured that it has changed a lot of things...