A collection of videos of police brutality • Hacker News Board

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#331

Post by salawat » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:09 AM UTC

Keverw wrote: post #157

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #95

Remember a few years ago it came out that Apple filed a patent to disable cameras in a localised area. Speculation was so that law enforcement could disable cameras during protests and riots. In the next few days/weeks, watch if people start saying that they're in these hot zones and their camera phones stop working

Wow really? Sounds like something that could be abused... But I know I seen some posts before talking about someone wanted to have a way to disable phones during concerts due to copyright concerns... But seems like with some things it starts out with one goal and then keeps getting expanded and expanded a little bit at a time.

This is the number one reason I can come off as inflexible in terms of sanctioning remote control or backdooring of user device features, or the implementation of anti-features.

Once you accept something controversial can be done be highly in situation X, the fact you allow it in situation X eventually gets used as a point that it should be allowed in situation Y, where Y was the controversial thing in the first place.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#332

Post by chillwaves » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:12 AM UTC

downerending wrote: post #313

wonderwonder wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So because the rioters are breaking the law it gives the police carte blanche to do the same? Amazing how cops in other western countries are able to enforce the law without killing thousands of citizens every year but ours cant. Sorry the cops have more pressing concerns than obeying the law? Then they should not be police officers. A whole lot of cops seem to have a whole lot of other pressing concerns standing aro…

No, it does not. A policeman acting like one of these rioters--kicking an unconscious person in the head--should be charged with attempted murder. And in my opinion, never breathe free air again. > if you spent your whole life getting treated as a second class citizen and peaceful protest did not work, and voting did not work, and nothing changed, could you not see yourself getting a little tired of living a lesser l…

Except that never happens. The accountability part. Police act up over and over and face no meaningful consequences, hence the rioting.

There's no question in the ability of the police to abuse the civilian population, we see it every day. Punch a police and see what happens, and then if they punch you again watch what happens.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#333

Post by vesky » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:15 AM UTC

bosie wrote: post #309

h3cate wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the part I personally cannot wrap my head around with all of this. These people are the people they are paid to protect. The people who live in their own communities. Yet they are carrying out these acts like they're in a foreign country.

> Yet they are carrying out these acts like they're in a foreign country. Which would make this better how exactly?

I did not take that as implying its somehow any better. I took it as a cultural separation that allows for an excuse to forgo morality in inflicting harsh threatments. (easier to bash someone's head in when they aren't your nextdoor neighbour).

Stop assuming the worst of others as the default. Unless of course you're doing it in bad faith.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#334

Post by alexashka » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:17 AM UTC

Lariscus wrote: post #264

alexashka wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I'm saying that anyone who gasps at how "unethical" other human beings are, wants eugenics, unless they're a real idiot who can't connect the dots to see that the only way to "fix" unethical behaviour is eugenics. I should say, most people who use the word "unethical" are of the real idiot variety. Arriving at eugenics as a potential solution to most of people's problems should automatically grant you a million d…

I see did not get that from you original comment but please enlighten me on how demanding ethical behaviour from software engineers leads to a eugenics program.

The level of idiocy required to believe that 'demanding ethical behaviour from software engineers' is at all a reasonable request, enables other idiotic ideas, such as 'demand ethical behaviour of all people' because why stop at software engineers, which naturally leads to eugenics if you believe some people are born with unethical tendencies that can't be corrected past birth, due to genetics.

Now I understand that you don't think demanding ethical behaviour is an idiotic idea.

What you don't know is that this idiotic idea has been rebutted a billion times already.

We have an entire branch of philosophy dedicated to it, called moral philosophy.

Let me save you some time:

Go ahead and define ethical. Define how you plan to demand. Explain how you make sure those enforcing the 'demanding' themselves don't become unethical and how you make sure you don't end up in a worse spot than where you started by attempting to demand something you can't even define or even if you could, you could never get everyone to agree with your definition because gasp, people thinks differently.

Here's a last kicker for you - suppose in your fairyland that cannot be, you did demand ethical behaviour and people listened, you know, because you're a violent dictator because nobody would listen otherwise. Another country goes ahead and does the unethical, gets ahead of your little ethical country, comes and crushes you, enslaves your ethical people and puts your head on a stick. How do you propose to win a zero-sum game of power if acting ethically dooms you to losing, or are you ok with going extinct in your noble ethical fashion? Good luck convincing the rest of your little ethical country to live ethically in fear of getting pillaged, raped and enslaved by the neighbours, in the name of ethics.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#335

Post by downerending » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:24 AM UTC

josephcsible wrote: post #324

downerending wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that all police should have body cams always, for the protection of all. I'm not aware of anyone that objects to this, though probably there are some. Furthermore, incidents like this have really made me reconsider my objections to the panopticon. These days, I think we'd be better off if there were cameras everywhere always, broadcasting instantaneously for public capture.

> I agree that all police should have body cams always, for the protection of all. I'm not aware of anyone that objects to this, though probably there are some. The Movement for Black Lives objects to body cams: https://m4bl.org/policy-platforms/end-the-war-on-black-peopl...

Wow. I have no idea what to say to that.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#336

Post by scarface74 » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:24 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #329

scarface74 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Michigan state government (legislature) postponed reopening out of fear of the armed protestors. What was the purpose of them showing up with guns if not to intimidate. But these are some more “very fine people”.

And once again you're taking remarks out of context and ignoring the half of the story that doesn't fit your preexisting beliefs. Here are some other remarks Trump made along with "very fine people": > we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America. > The driver of the car is a murderer. And what he did was a horrible, horrible, inexcusab…

What does that have to do with the armed Michigan protestors who stormed the state capital.

Excuse me, the armed Michigan protestors who stormed the state capital were “very good people”.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/01/politics/donald-trump-michiga...

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#337

Post by fulldecent2 » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:25 AM UTC

This site is terrible. It is a zero-effort collection of videos around one theme. And by turning these videos into copy-pasta without promoting the original sources of the video they are obscuring the and making it more difficult to fix police brutality.

A much better website would have contact information on it. And it would cite the original people that took the videos. And they could have asked those original people basic facts, such as the exact location and time of the recording.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#338

Post by chrismcb » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:26 AM UTC

Lariscus wrote: post #127

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #95

Remember a few years ago it came out that Apple filed a patent to disable cameras in a localised area. Speculation was so that law enforcement could disable cameras during protests and riots. In the next few days/weeks, watch if people start saying that they're in these hot zones and their camera phones stop working

Imagine being asked by your boss to implement such a thing and actually doing it. How spineless and unethical would you have to be to even consider following such an order.

Almost anything can have legitamate reasons. You can kill someone with a hammer, doesn't make it unethical to make a hammer. I don't know why you woukd have a reason to turn off a camera. What I'm saying is, it doesn't necessarily mean the programmers are unethical or evil.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#339

Post by rsynnott » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:28 AM UTC

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #321

rsynnott wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that’s be rather hard to do without contentious enabling legislation. It was more likely intended for company issued phones, to stop employees taking photos in the office (some offices still ban camera phones).

Legislation? You don't need legislation during a declared emergency. You don't need legislation to do anyway, you just go ahead and do it using whatever means at your disposal. The legal repercussions come later, if at ll.

Without legislation, how do you force Apple to deploy a change to everyone’s phone? That’s presumably what it would take.

Re: A collection of videos of police brutality

#340

Post by downerending » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #318

downerending wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without knowing whether minorities also commit crimes at a disproportionate rate, this isn't very meaningful.

The entire idea of “stop and frisk” is that the police have no idea whether they a are committing crimes or not beforehand. But if you stop more minorities than Whites in proportion to the population. even if the same number of crimes are being committed. Blacks will still be convicted more. More evidence that Whites are less likely to get tickets for the same offense. https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-raci…

Hmm--that doesn't match my impression. Rather, police would presumably stop and frisk people they pattern-matched as up to no good. (Popular niceties notwithstanding, police generally know the score.) If some group is committing a disproportionate number of crimes, it's entirely reasonable that they'd be stopped more.

I want my police to skillfully work on the crime problem, not carefully spend equal minutes on each demographic group.