101–110 of 115 posts
Coincidentally I was just watching this video and felt it was a pretty decent way to communicate this to old boomer city councils. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6oKX1w7k5w
Great video thanks. That guy is well spoken. Always find occasional really great speakers at these meetings. Alan McLintock comes to mind: https://youtu.be/KgEe22H3phg?t=2012
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't they instead push for making abuses of law enforcement access illegal? That way we can both catch criminals and missing people along with avoiding abuse.
> Why don't they instead push for making abuses of law enforcement access illegal? We did. Guess who you have to call when it happens?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why don't they instead push for making abuses of law enforcement access illegal? We did. Guess who you have to call when it happens?
Police are not above the law. Police officers can arrest and charge other police officers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_wall_of_silence
It's like communism; works great, until humans get involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was with you up until the very last line. Why do people imagine that the police are in the business of property retrieval? Once your stuff is stolen in almost all cases it's long LONG gone! Cars are sent to be broken down for parts, tools are sold to fences and so on. The typical thief isn't some mastermind who carefully holds on to what they stole, they rush to their nearest fence or dealer to trade it for what th…
With a few exceptions, like mob run baggage theft rings at big airports, criminals are not very smart and have pretty poor opsec. Solution rates could be a lot better than they are.
People want to not pay a lot for police, they want them well trained and highly accountable, they want excellent 'customer service', and they want to defund the police all at the same time. Out of this incoherent mess of conflicting desires the compromise is to focus on crime prevention, fighting organized crimes, or crimes against people rather than property as the top priorities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't they instead push for making abuses of law enforcement access illegal? That way we can both catch criminals and missing people along with avoiding abuse.
Those things are illegal, but it still happens because it is so easy and they usually aren't caught. We only hear about the rare instances where something actually happens to the cop doing it, most of the time it is never reported. This isn't because police are inherently horrible people, it is because they are normal humans. We all know people who would abuse the ability to track anyone they want. And we also have a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't they instead push for making abuses of law enforcement access illegal? That way we can both catch criminals and missing people along with avoiding abuse.
Because in the United States, cops are de facto above the law. Either because of qualified (translation: total) immunity or because if you try to enforce the law on them they throw tantrums and work stoppages. Attempting to constrain their behavior with the law is basically useless, so it has to be done on the level of functional capabilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because in the United States, cops are de facto above the law. Either because of qualified (translation: total) immunity or because if you try to enforce the law on them they throw tantrums and work stoppages. Attempting to constrain their behavior with the law is basically useless, so it has to be done on the level of functional capabilities.
Qualified immunity is not total immunity and throwing a tantrum doesn't prevent you from being arrested. There is plenty of body cam footage that attests to that.
> Approximately 4,000 NYPD officers took part in a protest that included blocking traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge and jumping over police barricades in an attempt to rush City Hall. Rioters were observed to be openly drinking, damaging cars, and physically attacking journalists from the New York Times on the scene. Rioters also chanted racial epithets towards the African-American Mayor Dinkins. The nearly 300 uniformed on-duty officers did little to control the riot.
> Of the nearly 10,000 participating officers, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly sanctioned 42 of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_San_Francisco_P...
> In early August 1975, the SFPD went on strike over a pay dispute, violating a California law prohibiting police from striking. The city quickly obtained a court order declaring the strike illegal and enjoining the SFPD back to work. The court messenger delivering the order was met with violence and the SFPD continued to strike. Only managers and African-American officers remained on duty, with 45 officers and three fire trucks responsible for a city population of 700,000. Supervisor Dianne Feinstein pleaded Mayor Joseph Alioto to ask Governor Jerry Brown to call out the National Guard to patrol the streets, but Alioto refused. When enraged civilians confronted SFPD officers at the picket lines, the officers arrested them. The strike was joined by the city's firefighters. The ACLU obtained a court order prohibiting strikers from carrying their service revolvers. Again, the SFPD ignored the court order. On August 20, a bomb detonated at the Mayor's home with a sign reading "Don't Threaten Us" left on his lawn. On August 21, Mayor Alioto advised the San Francisco Board of Supervisors that they should concede to the strikers' demands. The Supervisors unanimously refused. Mayor Alioto immediately then declared a state of emergency, assumed legislative powers, and granted the strikers' demands. City Supervisors and taxpayers sued but the court found that a contract obtained through an illegal strike is still legally enforceable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great video thanks. That guy is well spoken. Always find occasional really great speakers at these meetings. Alan McLintock comes to mind: https://youtu.be/KgEe22H3phg?t=2012
I watched his speech until he got cut off by the guy saying he's out of order and I have to admit I really didn't follow what he was saying
So the city council or mayor decided to re-schedule the agenda item or public comment so people couldn't speak. They still let the sales rep from Live View technology speak because they had known to put some special form to become an official speaker or whatnot.
One more thing was that they wrote the email saying it was rescheduled like a day or two before they sent it so it was last minute.
So all these people show up anyway and some protest outside and others decide to speak on other agenda items and just tie it back into the expensive park AI cameras at which point they are declared out of order by somebody.
So I guess he was speaking on some VPN item.
Rewatching it's not as good but it was creative for the situation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With a few exceptions, like mob run baggage theft rings at big airports, criminals are not very smart and have pretty poor opsec. Solution rates could be a lot better than they are.
The sort of low-level thieves you're thinking off sold off their ill-gotten gains within a very short time for a fraction of their value, often in a direct trade for drugs. It would be very hard to justify the investment required to prevent that, track the route property takes through handoff networks, and recover it in a form the owner would accept. Given that society suffers from more serious crimes that's generall…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feels like every other site that AI generates. Hard to tell what the creators believe and what is just probabilistically generated.
Nothing about this site screams AI to me. The site does its job well. Not sure what you are complaining about.
The copy - "it's not left, it's not right," short punchy sentences.
The spacing in the header - font sizes
The copy in the header - Too much text for a title
"Who We Are" section - has 4 symmetrical boxes, filling out the space with unnecessary detail.
The "cards" in the middle content section - Tons of detail . AI loves to generate these as the meat of a website.
The sections after, it begins to devolve into tangents/rambling , but still with excruciating detail. More small cards each with too much detail.
Lots of meaningless numbers highlighted. "20!" "13!"
"Timeline of documented abuse" - this section has text that is too small and a bullet list way too long. AI loves to use this very small text size. Spacing is weird and not made for/by a human.
It keeps going...
I'm sorry but you all need to level up your game wrt detecting AI.