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

Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

prismreports.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 222 posts

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#161

Post by cucumber3732842 »

mulmen wrote: post #157
baddash wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to be some annoying contrarian or something, but couldn't it be the case that if the govt was investing someone who was planning a terrorist attack, then notifying the person being investigated could work against stopping them? Not saying it wouldn't get abused though, which seems like the primary concern of most people in these discussions..

I think what gets lost in these conversations is that the government is using very lazy methods to catch low hanging fruit. Instead of extrajudicial spying they should be creating undercover identities and infiltrating criminal organizations. If law enforcement was competent Facebook wouldn’t even know it was happening.

I'm not sure if that's better. The feds have a long history of goading "probably harmless" people into parking SUVs full of half-ass explosives in NYC or kidnapping governors or whatever.

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#162

Post by [deleted] »

baddash wrote: post #92

My thoughts as someone who doesn't know much about these types of things: 1. Terry Albury calling this list the "Panopticon" could have merit since he's a former FBI agent. However, I'd have to research more into him to figure out how credible he is, and why he is framing it like this. 2. Amazon and Facebook being in the title is most likely clickbait. They're literally only mentioned once in the article and the rest…

[deleted]

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#164

Post by wesleychen »

saghm wrote: post #132
sailfast wrote: post #86

I don’t understand. This seems like some version of NextDoor / neighborhood watch but for companies and larger interests in the Seattle area that might have their own security apparatus. Why are folks jumping to some conclusions that this is some illuminati threat to democracy? Why is the article so breathless?

I don't know what neighborhood you live in, but there aren't many billion-dollar corporations hanging out on my block. Given how much shady stuff has come out about some of these companies, I don't think it's really that terrible a presumption that pretty much anything they've invested time and effort into that isn't already public knowledge might have been used for some stuff that we'd be unhappy to find out about.

The density of these offices in downtown Seattle is super high and it's also an area that has a lot of crime so this implementation makes sense. Probably low ROI in other areas like your neighborhood that don't fit this profile.

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#165

Post by gopher_space »

baddash wrote: post #122
josh2600 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is... under the laws as they're written today, if US Gov wants to take a peek at your stuff on FB and friends servers, FB can be barred from informing you that such a request has come in under the National Security Letter (NSL) guidelines. It's a very complicated thing :/.

I don't mean to be some annoying contrarian or something, but couldn't it be the case that if the govt was investing someone who was planning a terrorist attack, then notifying the person being investigated could work against stopping them? Not saying it wouldn't get abused though, which seems like the primary concern of most people in these discussions..

The panopticon reflects the trust I have in society.

It seems like an incredibly bad idea right now, but I can imagine machines of loving grace that would do only good with such a powerful tool.

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#166

Post by Slow_Hand »

j-bos wrote: post #110
errendgame wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people like me who had no idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology

In a similar but distinct vein: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White

That’s wild. I had no idea.

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#168

Post by skinfaxi »

gessha wrote: post #152
baddash wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to be some annoying contrarian or something, but couldn't it be the case that if the govt was investing someone who was planning a terrorist attack, then notifying the person being investigated could work against stopping them? Not saying it wouldn't get abused though, which seems like the primary concern of most people in these discussions..

Isn’t it better for all parties if the user is informed that they’re being investigated? This way they might stop from doing the act for which they’re investigated instead of actually carrying it out.

This is a bit different from flashing your headlights to warn oncoming traffic to a cop.

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#169

Post by keybored »

6thbit wrote: post #66
jedahan wrote: post #54

Reminder if you work for any of these companies (not unlikely on this site) you are actively enabling this. If your first reaction is doubt, deflection, rationalization or discomfort, there are ways out.

If you make open source used by any of this companies for this network, would you also characterize it as actively enabling this? If your retirement fund owns stocks of the s&p 500, does that make you an enabler? Are there really ways out?

Yes.

Re: Seattle Shield, an intelligence-sharing network operated by the Seattle police

#170

Post by cindyllm »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #161
mulmen wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what gets lost in these conversations is that the government is using very lazy methods to catch low hanging fruit. Instead of extrajudicial spying they should be creating undercover identities and infiltrating criminal organizations. If law enforcement was competent Facebook wouldn’t even know it was happening.

I'm not sure if that's better. The feds have a long history of goading "probably harmless" people into parking SUVs full of half-ass explosives in NYC or kidnapping governors or whatever.

[dead]
Post reply on HN