Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr • Hacker News Board

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#121

Post by joshribakoff » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:07 AM UTC

TeeMassive wrote: post #119

nullc wrote: post #107

This kind of surveillance is not very effective for preventing or solving crimes. It is much more effective at making lists of people willing to lawfully and peacefully stand for the human rights or others, -- "potential subversives", as the parties monitoring might call them. Imagine, instead, if law enforcement were to stand outside of a marijuana-legalization rally and collect the sort of data effectively collecte…

The problem right now is that there are a lot of people who want to (and did) commit violent acts and use black block tactics. They openly encourage lawful protesters to dress homogeneously all clad in black under the pretense of protecting protesters against police but in fact they do so to commit acts of violence and then meld away in the crowd, effectively taking hostage the lawful protesters. The argument can be…

As a law abiding protestor I don’t buy this because it was done to me without my knowledge. They can use tools to watch criminals without compiling data on peaceful protestors without their knowledge

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#122

Post by jerrybee » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:12 AM UTC

stefan_ wrote: post #33

jerrybee wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren’t the tweets ingested by Dataminr public? I agree this would be problematic if they were using private data, but using data available to anyone on the platform feels like fair game.

If the supreme court can learn new tricks, I'm confident HN can finally learn the difference between a police officer on his beat and a fully-automated data firehose mined in realtime or other perversions of technology. Witness United States v. Jones, the opinion delivered by Scalia: The Government contends that the Harlan standard shows that no search occurred here, since Jones had no “reasonable expectation of priv…

Viewing a public tweet is not trespassing - its the point of the entire platform. US vs Jones determined that installing a tracker on a private vehicle is trespassing.

As a tax payer, I would prefer my tax dollars are used as efficiently as possible - so if the alternative is to hire human police officers to manually search twitter and create reports then I would oppose that in favor of automated technology. I don't think the technology is the debate here, it simply enables us as humans to be more efficient. The decision to surveil is the debate here, and I can see it both ways. Do I think the police should be aware of a large gathering (regardless of purpose) in their cities? Yes, I think that's prudent for a variety of public safety reasons. Do I want this done in a way that does not interfere with protests or have a chilling effect? Yes, absolutely.

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#123

Post by Ar-Curunir » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:15 AM UTC

TeeMassive wrote: post #117

Ar-Curunir wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because handing more power to an over-militarized, violent, racist institution will inevitably result in retribution and harm to protestors and activists. For example, incidents like this: https://www.thedailybeast.com/norman-oklahoma-councilwoman-a...

Your argument would be more credible without emotion-base political accusations. If you want to look what a really "over-militarized, violent, racist institution" looks like than look at China. This doesn't even compare.

I mean, police in both countries can be over-militarized, violent, and racist. That's literally the origin of police in most countries: to coercively enforce the will of the state, usually against working-class and otherwise minority groups

(Also, you must really be willfully blind to think that militarization of American police is an "emotional" statement. It's been happening for decades and has been documented by every newspaper you could care to look at.)

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#124

Post by arminiusreturns » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:22 AM UTC

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #46

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #9

I get the sense that most HN commenters are against having police surveil this kind of event in the U.S. Could someone share the reasons for this strong opposition? Personally, I can imagine valid reasons for and against conducting such surveillance. But given how many people feel otherwise, I wonder if I'm missing something.

>I get the sense that most HN commenters are against having police surveil this kind of event in the U.S. Look to your left and right. The people building this dystopia are right here on this site.

"Notably, Epstein, who was known for his interest in obtaining blackmail through the sexual abuse of the underaged girls he exploited, also claimed to have “damaging information” on prominent figures in Silicon Valley. In a conversation last year with New York Times reporter James Stewart, Epstein claimed to have “potentially damaging or embarrassing” information on Silicon Valley’s elite and told Stewart that these top figures in the American tech industry “were hedonistic and regular users of recreational drugs.” Epstein also told Stewart that he had “witnessed prominent tech figures taking drugs and arranging for sex” and claimed to know “details about their supposed sexual proclivities.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-...

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#125

Post by titzer » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:31 AM UTC

darawk wrote: post #53

titzer wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that I would like surveiled This part of your comment really, really rubs me the wrong way. Your personal inclinations absolutely cannot direct the apparatus of state on a whim. Either those groups are suspected of criminal activity or conspiracy to commit criminal activity, which is probable cause for surveillance, or they aren't.

> This part of your comment really, really rubs me the wrong way. Your personal inclinations absolutely cannot direct the apparatus of state on a whim Last I checked, we lived in a democracy. A democracy is composed of the collective whims of the citizens. I'm simply registering mine. You're free to oppose if you so desire. My point though is simply to illustrate the ideological contradiction latent in the comment I…

> Last I checked, we lived in a democracy.

The United States is a Constitutional Republic with rights explicitly enshrined therein, including its amendments. You are more than welcome to your opinion on violating constitutional rights but if you want the rule of law then you should follow the constitutional process to add an amendment in order to revoke said rights.

> So, you are opposed to government surveillance of neo-nazi groups that eschew violence, then?

Yes! You either believe in free speech and freedom of assembly or you don't. If these groups are a clear and present danger, show probable cause already. If they aren't, counter-protest, shame them, embarrass them, whatever.

More often than not, hate groups can't help but cross that line to violence or are already linked to violence. It's really almost an oxymoron to talk about neo-Nazi groups that "eschew violence" since they almost always believe in genocide and the violent overthrow of the government and are working towards it. I know it's a tempting rhetorical device, but it's really a strawman.

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#126

Post by sleepinseattle » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:41 AM UTC

TeeMassive wrote: post #117

Ar-Curunir wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because handing more power to an over-militarized, violent, racist institution will inevitably result in retribution and harm to protestors and activists. For example, incidents like this: https://www.thedailybeast.com/norman-oklahoma-councilwoman-a...

Your argument would be more credible without emotion-base political accusations. If you want to look what a really "over-militarized, violent, racist institution" looks like than look at China. This doesn't even compare.

Look no further than the rampant white collar crime that goes un-prosecuted in the US. No one is being held accountable for PPP corruption.

Of course being anti-racist is emotional. How can you not feel very upset when contemplating the racial inequities in this country?

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#127

Post by jadell » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 3:57 AM UTC

darawk wrote: post #58

rapind wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think deeply about what you're proposing.

I am thinking about it. Think about what you are proposing. Do you really want to take the position that the government cannot monitor any group until it commits a crime?

Yes.

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#128

Post by mintplant » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 4:01 AM UTC

TeeMassive wrote: post #119

nullc wrote: post #107

This kind of surveillance is not very effective for preventing or solving crimes. It is much more effective at making lists of people willing to lawfully and peacefully stand for the human rights or others, -- "potential subversives", as the parties monitoring might call them. Imagine, instead, if law enforcement were to stand outside of a marijuana-legalization rally and collect the sort of data effectively collecte…

The problem right now is that there are a lot of people who want to (and did) commit violent acts and use black block tactics. They openly encourage lawful protesters to dress homogeneously all clad in black under the pretense of protecting protesters against police but in fact they do so to commit acts of violence and then meld away in the crowd, effectively taking hostage the lawful protesters. The argument can be…

You write with such conviction and certainty, and yet I must point out that it's black bloc, not "block".

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#129

Post by due737y3 » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 4:02 AM UTC

nullc wrote: post #107

This kind of surveillance is not very effective for preventing or solving crimes. It is much more effective at making lists of people willing to lawfully and peacefully stand for the human rights or others, -- "potential subversives", as the parties monitoring might call them. Imagine, instead, if law enforcement were to stand outside of a marijuana-legalization rally and collect the sort of data effectively collecte…

I'm not sure the crime solving utility is wholly relevant here, police have other duties like maintaining public safety. The obvious utility seems to be monitoring different protest zones for signs that violence is beginning to break out. If x people are suddenly tweeting about a fire or gun shots near an active protest then you know it would probably be wise to at least send a scout over there to evaluate the situation. This method also has the benefit of removing the need to have riot-ready police pre-emptively deployed to zones where everyone is keeping things calm.

Anecdotally, I was able to spectate active looting in my own city's downtown when the protests first came to us via various livestreaming instagrammers and while it was mostly a curiosity for me I imagine it would have been useful to a dispatcher who had to decide where to send officers. I don't see why twitter couldn't serve a similarly useful purpose.

Re: Police surveilled protests with help from Twitter-affiliated startup Dataminr

#130

Post by squeaky-clean » Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 4:10 AM UTC

Natsu wrote: post #82

slg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, this goes because just surveilling a legal protest. These protests were specifically against the police's abuse of their power. This resulted in a police response that was much more adversarial than a traditional legal protest would face. Aiding the police in surveilling protesters allows police to further abuse their power and target protesters for retribution. Providing this monitoring isn't that dif…

At least 17 people were murdered during this time and a few more since this was posted: https://www.thepostemail.com/2020/06/03/twitter-user-compile... The posts are public and the police cannot go after anyone for simply engaging in protected speech, but they can and have identified looters and murderers who have tried to discredit the fact that black lives matter with their actions. So I'm not clear why so many peo…

> The posts are public and the police cannot go after anyone for simply engaging in protected speech,

"police SHOULD NOT go after anyone for simply engaging in protected speech".

FTFY

They can do lots of things they should not. They should not run cars into protesters. They should not push over old men who are not causing trouble. They should not shoot unarmed people in the back who are running away. They should not kill a black man by choking him to death with their knee over a false counterfeit bill complaint.

And yet all these things happen. The police should not go after innocent protesters, but there's no way in hell I will believe that they will not, or are not doing so.