[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
61–70 of 135 posts
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#62Why are they comfortable saying this? > Generally, Boyd said his office uses the software to find “avenues for obtaining probable cause” or “to verify reasonable suspicion that you already have”—not as a basis by itself to make arrests. As if that's not a massive violation of our rights in and of itself. This is my fundamental problem with the internet. As much as stories like these gain traction, as many millions of…
>"to verify reasonable suspicion that you already have”
Translation: "Sprinkle some crack on him and let's get the hell out of here."
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#63[flagged]
It isn't black and white.
Deploy trust circumstantially.
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
That isn't the muskets version of that argument I have heard. The version I've heard is that the firearm technology when the second amendment was ratified was very different than today and that makes it worth evaluating if we want to amend it again. Similarly the military landscape looks very different as well such that there's a very different risk of foreign armies taking ground and citizens everywhere needing to b…
>The version I've heard is that the firearm technology when the second amendment was ratified was very different than today and that makes it worth evaluating if we want to amend it again. That's an even worse argument because it's seemingly trying to both to do an motte-and-bailey and strawman at the same time. The motte and bailey comes from seemingly trying to present as sympathetic of an argument as possible. I m…
You've reduced this discussion to meta-debate (again, it seems) and it's stifling productive conversation.
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why are they comfortable saying this? They receive recognition for the results. Phone data was used in a large fraction of the cases against rioters in the 2021 capital attack. The Powers That Be were grateful that law enforcement were able to use phone data to either initially identify attackers or corroborate other evidence, and ultimately put people in prison. The justice system makes cases with this every day,…
Tools like this are substantially different than time/location Bound geofences with warrants served to providers like were used in the Jan 6 investigations. And even those are under SCOTUS scrutiny for 4th amendment concerns.
Results compel expectations, and every "success" unlocks more latitude. A rational person cannot admire headlines that trumpet the wonderful achievements of digital dragnets in one case, and then suffer "concern" when more aggressive techniques are employed elsewhere: there are powerful incentives involved, as any thinking person should know. J6 was a big unlock for state surveillance; the results were met with gushing praise and no friction was incurred. Now, new bounds are being pushed and the tools proliferate, as the fine distinctions you cling to are blithely forgone.
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
The interesting part here is that they are apparently no longer even trying to use parallel construction [0] to cover this stuff up. They somehow feel confident that just saying we have this technology, we don’t say how we use it, but we wind up on the right trail and then gather some evidence down the road we wound up on somehow. Seems shaky at best. Smells of hubris. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_const…
Nothing will change until and unless police start suffering severe consequences for breaking the law. Such consequences will never come from the state.
[deleted]
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#67Isn’t this type of software illegal? If I went to try and sell it , I’d be arrested.
I highly doubt that…
Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#68Re: Texas police invested in phone-tracking software and won’t say how it’s used
#69Why are they comfortable saying this? > Generally, Boyd said his office uses the software to find “avenues for obtaining probable cause” or “to verify reasonable suspicion that you already have”—not as a basis by itself to make arrests. As if that's not a massive violation of our rights in and of itself. This is my fundamental problem with the internet. As much as stories like these gain traction, as many millions of…
They’re comfortable saying this because the US doesn’t have the rule of law, as evidenced by laws not applying to police.