A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry • Hacker News Board

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#101

Post by Mindstormy » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:07 PM UTC

berberous wrote: post #21

r0h1n wrote: post #6

I'm curious - how exactly would one refute the following argument put forth by data brokers and repo agents? > But Digital Recognition and other so-called “data brokers” who collect plate scans are fighting Hecht’s bill, arguing that repo agents are not invading privacy when they scan a license plate, which is available for all to see. The data brokers do not disclose the owner of the plates, they point out, though…

The scan of the license plan is not really the issue, it's the collecting of the scan, tagging it with GPS, and aggregating the scan into large, permanent databases that can be accessed by both government and private corporations. If all you do is scan a plate and display "car payments past due", or discard the scan if the car is not wanted, it's not all that different from a human looking for a car. But these folks…

Is it legal or even possible to prevent these scanning devices from working by having say a ring of infrared LED's shining on your license plate to prevent a camera from being able to capture it?

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#102

Post by GFischer » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:10 PM UTC

Wistar wrote: post #98

landryraccoon wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strict screening will make it harder for the poor, who have poor credit, to buy a car. Tracking vehicles will make lenders less paranoid about lending, which will enable less wealthy households to lend. IMO if you're wealthy ( like the vast majority of the readers of HN ) you should be able to opt out of tracking for an additional financing feel whereas the poor should still be able to voluntarily subject themselves…

The "Buy Here Pay Here" car sales lots that sell primarily to low-income folks often install tracking equipment in the vehicles they sell as a part of the deal. Ken Bensinger's 2011 LA Times series about the practices of Buy-Here-Pay-Here car sales businesses: "A vicious cycle in the used-car business" http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/30/business/la-fi-buy-h... Fairly depressing.

To me, used to the abusive interest rates here in Uruguay, 20% sounds really good.

And while the tactic they used to repossess the car was pretty shady, they were in their right. And 25% default rate is tough.

It's depressing, but the alternative would be leaving people with no financing options.

A NGO or maybe a startup that helped people balance their economies would be doing a lot of help, in the U.S. and everywhere. I've read about some that try to disrupt lenders, including a Y Combinator backed one (LendUp).

http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/12/lendup-raises-14m-from-goog...

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#103

Post by dntrkv » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:14 PM UTC

300bps wrote: post #96

TeMPOraL wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this as a general trend of misattributing problems to technology that are actually caused by one's own behaviour. Lying to people is a bad idea; some people mistakenly believe that they can lie freely without others knowing, and then cry foul when new technologies threaten that belief. Everything we do, everything we say, has consequences that spread through the great web of causation; technology only allows us…

I see this as a general trend of misattributing problems to technology that are actually caused by one's own behaviour. I see. So stop doing anything controversial and you'll be just fine, right? We better tell closeted homosexuals that someone tracking their movements isn't the problem; their behavior is the problem. How about atheists? They're more disliked in the U.S. than just about any group out there ( http://w…

I see. So stop doing anything controversial and you'll be just fine, right?

No. But if you are lying, you have to realize that you can be caught. The fact that some kind of technology makes it easier for you to be caught is not the technologies fault. Phones, cameras, computers, internet, all make it easier for you to be caught doing something you weren't supposed to be doing.

Should it be illegal for photographers to take pictures of people in public? What if that photographer publishes the pictures on their blog? What about people taking pictures/videos of police officers? Should they be allowed to upload these pictures/videos to the internet?

We better tell closeted homosexuals that someone tracking their movements isn't the problem; their behavior is the problem.

No, the problem is people that have problems with homosexuals.

How about atheists? They're more disliked in the U.S. than just about any group out there (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-atheists-we-dis...). I guess the problem isn't their boss checking via license plate scanning whether or not they go to church every week, their behavior is the problem.

Again, the problem here is the boss checking the license plates to make sure the employee goes to church. It's not that the plates are being logged, it's that the data is being used in a malicious manner.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#104

Post by CodeMage » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:15 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #62

berberous wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scan of the license plan is not really the issue, it's the collecting of the scan, tagging it with GPS, and aggregating the scan into large, permanent databases that can be accessed by both government and private corporations. If all you do is scan a plate and display "car payments past due", or discard the scan if the car is not wanted, it's not all that different from a human looking for a car. But these folks…

I don't see how quantity suddenly transforms a permitted thing into a forbidden one. If I don't need your permission to look at your car's licence plate on a public street and write down when and where I saw it, or simply take a photo of said licence plate (as photos currently include timestamp+location) - then the situation doesn't change in any way and I still don't need your permission even if I did the same for a…

Somehow, I doubt that this would be the first time the legislation had to deal with a Sorites paradox.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#105

Post by TeMPOraL » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:19 PM UTC

300bps wrote: post #96

TeMPOraL wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this as a general trend of misattributing problems to technology that are actually caused by one's own behaviour. Lying to people is a bad idea; some people mistakenly believe that they can lie freely without others knowing, and then cry foul when new technologies threaten that belief. Everything we do, everything we say, has consequences that spread through the great web of causation; technology only allows us…

I see this as a general trend of misattributing problems to technology that are actually caused by one's own behaviour. I see. So stop doing anything controversial and you'll be just fine, right? We better tell closeted homosexuals that someone tracking their movements isn't the problem; their behavior is the problem. How about atheists? They're more disliked in the U.S. than just about any group out there ( http://w…

> We better tell closeted homosexuals that someone tracking their movements isn't the problem; their behavior is the problem.

No, my point is that it's the people doing the checking to then hurt others that are the problem, not the tools used to track, and not even the act of tracking.

> You really can't imagine a scenario where a rogue cop pulls over a young girl, becomes obsessed with her and then begins stalking her(...)

I can, but again, it's the cop who is the problem, not Google or Facebook or ALPRs.

> This is astoundingly pseudo-intellectual tripe.

It may sound like that for people who don't grok it, but it's actually also the base for my whole argument. If you understand this "tripe", then you can see that there are pretty much infinite ways you can use to obtain particular information; they only differ in cost. You can't ban them all. Progress of technology only reduces the cost of accessing some facts about the real world.

Let's look for ways to stop people from doing bad things instead of trying to fight the progress, with all the benefits it brings. For centuries we relied on limited access to information as a proxy for safety. We can't do that anymore.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#106

Post by Ryanmf » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:19 PM UTC

Easy fix: pay for access to the DB and a few others like it, plot the movements of congresscritters, judges, DAs, et al. and publish. The brokers will be swimming in injunctions by the end of the week.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#107

Post by ellyagg » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:29 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #62

berberous wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scan of the license plan is not really the issue, it's the collecting of the scan, tagging it with GPS, and aggregating the scan into large, permanent databases that can be accessed by both government and private corporations. If all you do is scan a plate and display "car payments past due", or discard the scan if the car is not wanted, it's not all that different from a human looking for a car. But these folks…

I don't see how quantity suddenly transforms a permitted thing into a forbidden one. If I don't need your permission to look at your car's licence plate on a public street and write down when and where I saw it, or simply take a photo of said licence plate (as photos currently include timestamp+location) - then the situation doesn't change in any way and I still don't need your permission even if I did the same for a…

Differences in degree produce differences in kind all the time. Some places you're allowed to have small amounts of recreational drugs, but if you have large amounts you're presumed drug dealing. Over the years we've allowed tips uncovered on undercover operations to nab unrelated criminal activity; now that the government is shown to be monitoring online behavior on most of us, we recognize it as a problem. Some places you're allowed to cut down a Christmas tree but if you clear cut the forest, people would look askance. The examples of quantity mattering are endless. Often the issue has to do with power. Once the quantity and efficiency of an activity affords vast new power, that power must be scrutinized and regulated.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#108

Post by TeMPOraL » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:30 PM UTC

ryusage wrote: post #52

talmand wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, I would imagine it is much easier for a good number of people to go cash only to avoid that, as opposed to never driving a car again. Then when face recognition kicks in, never going out in public. Might be an opportunity in there somewhere for selling comfortable face masks.

I'm curious when we'll start seeing people dressing like this: http://ahprojects.com/projects/stealth-wear

Hopefully never; discounting war and other emergencies, it's a waste of material. The moment people wearing such things become an issue, the government or a company will get few undergrads to fix the image recognition algorithm and boom, all the protection is gone in the blink of an updating flash memory.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#109

Post by deeths » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:37 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #62

berberous wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scan of the license plan is not really the issue, it's the collecting of the scan, tagging it with GPS, and aggregating the scan into large, permanent databases that can be accessed by both government and private corporations. If all you do is scan a plate and display "car payments past due", or discard the scan if the car is not wanted, it's not all that different from a human looking for a car. But these folks…

I don't see how quantity suddenly transforms a permitted thing into a forbidden one. If I don't need your permission to look at your car's licence plate on a public street and write down when and where I saw it, or simply take a photo of said licence plate (as photos currently include timestamp+location) - then the situation doesn't change in any way and I still don't need your permission even if I did the same for a…

The law has thousands of examples of quantity turning permitted things into forbidden ones (or at least regulated ones, which is probably more the case here). This is in no way a unique restriction.

For example:

1) If someone glances in your window as they walk by your house, that's fine. If they stand there all day, they're probably guilty of stalking, a crime.

2) If one person is holding a protest sign in front of city hall, that's legal. If a thousand people do it, that's a protest, which in most cities is a regulated activity requiring a permit.

3) If you pour your morning orange juice out in a storm drain, that's probably legal. If you pour thousands of gallons of OJ into a storm drain, you're breaking environmental laws.

4) If someone drives by a street, that's fine. If they go back and forth down it, they're cruising, which is a crime in many cities.

5) If you give a friend $100, it's an unregulated gift. If you give them $20k, then that's regulated by tax laws.

6) If someone sells a stock and buys it back, that's fine. If they do it tens of thousands of times in a minute, they may be breaking securities laws.

7) If you bring $1000 into the country, that's an unregulated event. If you bring $100k, it becomes regulated.

8) If you access a web site with an automatic tool, that's fine. If you access it a thousand times a second, that's a DDoS attack, which is a crime.

9) If you cut a tree down on your property to sell the wood, that's fine. If you cut hundreds down, then you're running an illegal logging operation.

and on and on.

I totally don't buy the argument that it's unreasonable to forbid or regulate the case of collecting license plate numbers based on it just being a different quantity of something that's permitted. Laws use quantity as the basis for drawing the line between legal/illegal or unregulated/regulated all the time.

Re: A vast hidden surveillance network, powered by the repo industry

#110

Post by graylights » Wed, Mar 05, 2014, 6:45 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #65

belorn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not about invading privacy, but rather about illegal handling of private and sensitive information. The information about who is where and when is information that should be treated in similar way as credit cards numbers, medical information, and so on. Repo agents do not actually need to store this for their businesses, so their argument is easy refuted by simply denying their ability to profit by selling sensit…

If I'm walking on a public street, then that isn't private information - unlike medical information that's entrusted to some specific people bound by restrictions, what happens on the street is public data. And I'm perfectly allowed to say "hey, you know what? Yesterday I saw Belorn walking down that street!" no matter if you want to hide that - it's not dissemination of private and sensitive information.

I agree public street is public info. But it sounds like they're scanning more then public street. At what point does it become private? 1. Parked on a public street in front of my home 2. Parked on private parking lot at my apartment 3. Parked in my driveway 4. Parked in my garage with door open. 5. Parked in my garage but visible through window if you angle the camera just right.