Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

coveillance.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 339 posts

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#121

Post by saltyoldman »

anigbrowl wrote: post #81
saltyoldman wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see it in court now. Our AI monitoring system did indeed know about the threat to the building where 800 people died on Sunday. It says: " Agent: Voice to text detected: I have everything ready - all the XXX chemicals are ready in the van and I'm going to park in the 900 S Crap St now" Agent: Thread Level HIGH. Agent: Looking up local codes. Agent: Mayor signed SB-1238 in 2026 - no surveillance devices may be u…

Oh, only 800? Maybe you can pick a larger imaginary number to make me feel really guilty about not wanting to give up my rights to live free of surveillance.

I mean yeah, but I don't need to. These cameras ARE already the result of 9/11.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#122

Post by hamdingers »

goda90 wrote: post #57
Fogest wrote: post #33

I still feel so conflicted on things like the Flock cameras. On one hand I understand that they have the capability of incredibly enhancing the ability for police departments to solve more crimes. Especially things related to vehicle theft, they could likely track down your stolen vehicle very quickly especially if they have a wide network of cameras. However, my concern is always about the possibility for misuse. Ev…

What if instead of trying to figure out how to catch criminals, we focus on building a society where no one wants to be a criminal? Can we find solutions to what causes crime, like desperation, greed, fear, failure to understand and have compassion for other people, etc?

A leading cause of premature death in the US is car crashes. Car crashes are in almost all cases caused or exacerbated by operator negligence. That negligence is not caused by desperation/greed/fear/lack of empathy, but by a confidence that one won't get caught or punished.

I can't imagine a better way to deal with this problem than with cameras that can detect these behaviors and issue citations impartially and consistently.

It's totally possible to implement a system where cameras do this but do not record enough data to amount to consistent surveillance of people who aren't acting negligent (i.e. using radar to trigger them), but as long as the conversation is "cameras everywhere vs no cameras ever" these kinds of compromises seem unlikely.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#123

Post by sellmesoap »

smithoc wrote: post #104
nostromo wrote: post #72

I think this is just the new normal. My car was stolen in Seattle and it was found with the person driving it when he was pulled over by police. In the car he had paperwork with his name on it, a weapon, and his work uniform in the trunk with a name badge (he was a security guard - lol) along with a neighborhood witness. Despite a mountain of evidence, the prosecutors declined to press charges because without direct…

This anecdote may be true, but is certainly not representative of current life in America. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St... Millions in prison, massively disproportionate to the rest of the world. If jurors in Seattle have become skeptical of the claims that police and prosecutors make without evidence, the blame should fall squarely on decades of innocent people being se…

It's a large country with subtle differencies across the states but this story came to mind immediately https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48249747

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#124

Post by sandcat_ »

richard_chase wrote: post #31

Saying that patterns are dangerous because they can reinforce stereotypes sounds a lot like you are saying the stereotypes are true.

The problem with stereotypes isn’t their accuracy (they often are inaccurate or outdated but that’s beside the point).

Otherwise you are effectively saying that it’s ok to be *-ist as long as you’re accurate.

The problem is they are unfair, dehumanizing and cruel, and based off categories we usually can’t control.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#125

Post by daedrdev »

smithoc wrote: post #104
nostromo wrote: post #72

I think this is just the new normal. My car was stolen in Seattle and it was found with the person driving it when he was pulled over by police. In the car he had paperwork with his name on it, a weapon, and his work uniform in the trunk with a name badge (he was a security guard - lol) along with a neighborhood witness. Despite a mountain of evidence, the prosecutors declined to press charges because without direct…

This anecdote may be true, but is certainly not representative of current life in America. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St... Millions in prison, massively disproportionate to the rest of the world. If jurors in Seattle have become skeptical of the claims that police and prosecutors make without evidence, the blame should fall squarely on decades of innocent people being se…

The majority of people in prisons in the US are incarcerated for violent crime. 64% of violent criminals are rearrested compared to 40% of nonviolent criminals. It really looks like the US is being somewhat efficient here and just has a lot of crime.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#126

Post by bmitch3020 »

fny wrote: post #107
nostromo wrote: post #72

I think this is just the new normal. My car was stolen in Seattle and it was found with the person driving it when he was pulled over by police. In the car he had paperwork with his name on it, a weapon, and his work uniform in the trunk with a name badge (he was a security guard - lol) along with a neighborhood witness. Despite a mountain of evidence, the prosecutors declined to press charges because without direct…

Your forgetting the nonsense a defense attorney will conjure. How do you know he didn't buy the car from the thief? We had a similar issue with the hit and run of my grandfather: even though video evidence found the car and later saw the suspect leave the car, the detectives worried a defence attorney would argue someone else may have been driving at the time the accident (e.g his wife), and therefore "beyond reasona…

> How do you know he didn't buy the car from the thief?

If you're caught with stolen property, particularly a vehicle that has a title, I think the burden is on you to prove you thought you bought the car legitimately. Show a bill-of-sale, signed title, or any other evidence of a transaction. Particularly when that evidence includes identifying information of the seller.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#127

Post by mixmastamyk »

shortstuffsushi wrote: post #83
Bratmon wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not live in one of the cities that have issues with a large homeless population, so the experience is a bit lost on me That's the key experience you're missing. If you've never lived in a high-homeless/drug abuse area, you don't really understand how thoroughly draining it is on every aspect of civic life.

I recognize that I'm missing that part of the context, but it still surprises me that the answer to that is relatively global surveillance. In the current state of things, homelessness is perfectly public and observable, right? And so at any point now, the proposed "enforcement" could take place without the need for cameras? I think that part is unclear to me as well, the problem that exists that this solves.

Yes. It solves the "surveillance tech company needs to make quarterly goals" problem, and the "politician needs to look like they are doing something about crime" problem.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#128

Post by dylan604 »

bonoboTP wrote: post #113
dylan604 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, sometimes, you just gotta get to work and the busses just aren't going to get you there in time. /s I was in a jury pool not in Seattle for a guy that already pled guilty for GTA, so it was just the sentencing part. The defense attorney asked if I thought it might be possible to sentence the minimum. I said yes. The prosecutor asked if I thought I could give the the maximum sentence of 99 years. I said for…

I thought jurors don't decide the sentence length, just the (not) guilty verdict. Are you implying they were testing whether you're willing to let the judge use the entire span of sentencing available in law? Otherwise I'm not sure what you mean that you were bounced from the jury because the defense lawyer wanted you to be fine with 99 years in prison for his client.

Nope. The jury was to give the sentence. This depends on jurisdiction when the jury does the sentencing. Capital murder cases are a famous example. I guess I was lucky that my local jurisdiction said GTA was worth of a jury sentencing??

The defense attorney was looking for jurors sympathetic to giving his client the least time possible. The prosecutor was looking for people to throw the book at the defendant and be open to maximum sentencing. Because I was not, he struck me.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#129

Post by smithkl42 »

thewebguyd wrote: post #14
smithkl42 wrote: post #10

I wonder what they mean by this? > The camera can have different ways of seeing encoded in it, including kinds of gazes that enforce social agreements about what kinds of behavior and people are considered “normal” The phrase "kinds of gazes" strikes me as the sort of thing that's only going to make sense to people trained in a very particular and idiosyncratic flavor of ethical critique. What a normal person sees he…

> acting bizarre and dangerous The problem with surveillance like this becomes "who gets to decide what is bizarre and dangerous?"

Until we have robot police officers, there will always be a human in the loop. But right now, there's a whole category of "drunk and disorderly" / "breach of the peace" kinds of laws that are ~100% up to the discretion of a police officer to enforce. I won't say you CAN'T have it any other way, because I can imagine alternatives like "don't have those laws", but I will say that you don't WANT to have it any other way.

Re: A walking tour of surveillance infrastructure in Seattle (2020)

#130

Post by smithkl42 »

brailsafe wrote: post #74
matheusmoreira wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ones bought and paid for by billion dollar corporations and industries?

The entire city of Seattle seems to have been bought and paid for by basically 2 - 4 companies. Microsoft, Amazon, Boeing, ...Starbucks in year's past maybe?

If that was the case, it seems like those companies would have forced the city to clean up 10th and Jackson.
Post reply on HN