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

181–190 of 339 posts

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

#181

Post by Teever »

rafram wrote: post #153
bmitch3020 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

This is a misunderstanding of the American justice system at the most basic level. The burden is never on the defendant to prove their innocence. If the prosecution can’t prove that you stole it or knew it was stolen when you bought it, you aren’t guilty.

[flagged]

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

#182

Post by HNisCIS »

throwaway-blaze wrote: post #139

I don't like needless surveillance either but we have people (and kids!) getting shot all over the city, and juries and judges that won't do anything without video or photographic evidence of the crime. I am literally willing to trade some of my liberty for safety in this case. When crime is under control, let's discuss getting rid of them (which I know is farfetched).

There are a multitude of ways to significantly curtail crime that don't rely on this paradigm of spying on everyone. That's like saying "I can't get to work on time, we need to keep making the highway wider".

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

#183

Post by glaslong »

reaperducer wrote: post #40
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…

On one hand I understand that they have the capability of incredibly enhancing the ability for police departments to solve more crimes. Do they? There are millions of these cameras all around the country, yet when pressed about their value, Flock and cops can only point to one or two crimes prevented/solved at a time. And they're usually things like "caught a burglar after the fact," or "stopped someone from dumpster…

I'm skeptical as well. Was recently on a jury for a murder case of all things, and while they had a ton of footage from traffic cameras across 3 separate towns, MOST of the evidence that was really damning was a combo of prints at the scene and location data from cell providers and phone extraction.

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

#184

Post by awesome_dude »

VohuMana wrote: post #177
runjake wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're wondering what is being discussed in the meetings about whether or not more surveillance should be deployed, at the city and county levels, this is it. Crime isn't being prosecuted, the criminals know it, and this breeds more crime (and more criminals). Even when they are imprisoned and incarcerated, they're probably in jail for somewhere between 24 hours and a few weeks. They know pretty much everyone else…

Honest question, do we know why crime isn’t being prosecuted anymore? I’ve noticed where I live this definitely seems to be the case and has a two fold effect, police aren’t even bothering to enforce laws because when they do the city/county refuses to prosecute and then criminals are getting wise to this and escalating their crimes. Previously where I live there would be violent crimes but generally in the early hou…

There's a lot here to unpack - and it's incredibly nuanced.

Crime in most countries is on the decline, there have been "blips" or "spikes", but the reality is that crime is decreasing.

When people talk about communities not being policed, there's also multiple things at play - partly it's perception, which is subjective, and not very reliable (back in my dayyyyyy), and partly it's about focus.

As for prosecution - most countries are realising that prosecution leading to incarceration is counter productive - as the GP touched on, prison becomes a University for criminals, as well as a record being prohibitive in getting individuals "on the right track" - that is, they become more isolated and excluded, leaving them with fewer choices when it comes to behaviour.

I'm middle aged, and for my entire life, the same drum has been beaten - crime is rising, children don't respect their elders, youth are getting away with crime, there should be harsher punishments, and so on.

But the hard facts have shown otherwise (as to /why/ crime is dropping, that's a genuine subject for debate, for example the removal of lead in petrol is now thought to be one of the key reasons that violent crime is dropping)

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

#185

Post by runjake »

VohuMana wrote: post #177
runjake wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're wondering what is being discussed in the meetings about whether or not more surveillance should be deployed, at the city and county levels, this is it. Crime isn't being prosecuted, the criminals know it, and this breeds more crime (and more criminals). Even when they are imprisoned and incarcerated, they're probably in jail for somewhere between 24 hours and a few weeks. They know pretty much everyone else…

Honest question, do we know why crime isn’t being prosecuted anymore? I’ve noticed where I live this definitely seems to be the case and has a two fold effect, police aren’t even bothering to enforce laws because when they do the city/county refuses to prosecute and then criminals are getting wise to this and escalating their crimes. Previously where I live there would be violent crimes but generally in the early hou…

I'm not qualified to answer, but I regularly hear the following in the US:

- Not enough (LE|DA|jail) funding or staffing or space.

- "We want to focus on violent crimes". I have a whole rant about this, watching violent criminals/rapists going through revolving doors.

- Use of diversion and "restorative justice" programs, which clearly do not work for certain classes of criminals with very long rap sheets, but here we are.

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

#186

Post by HNisCIS »

shermantanktop wrote: post #11

Lots of po-mo art-school language on this site about “encoding ways of seeing” and “gazes.” The content itself is somewhat interesting but imo plain language would be more accessible.

On one hand yeah it's a little over the top.

On the other hand I don't think this was written for our proto-techno-fascist forum...

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

#187

Post by drnick1 »

hammock wrote: post #99
drnick1 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you suggest we move to then, China?

The countryside. Near-zero public surveillance, near-zero violent crime, and conservative sheriffs and juries who work to keep it that way.

My goat herding skills are rusty. How do I make a living in the countryside?

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

#188

Post by hitekker »

VohuMana wrote: post #177
runjake wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're wondering what is being discussed in the meetings about whether or not more surveillance should be deployed, at the city and county levels, this is it. Crime isn't being prosecuted, the criminals know it, and this breeds more crime (and more criminals). Even when they are imprisoned and incarcerated, they're probably in jail for somewhere between 24 hours and a few weeks. They know pretty much everyone else…

Honest question, do we know why crime isn’t being prosecuted anymore? I’ve noticed where I live this definitely seems to be the case and has a two fold effect, police aren’t even bothering to enforce laws because when they do the city/county refuses to prosecute and then criminals are getting wise to this and escalating their crimes. Previously where I live there would be violent crimes but generally in the early hou…

[flagged]

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

#189

Post by redsocksfan45 »

dhosek wrote: post #163
gwbas1c wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because jurors in Seattle have become accustom to thinking that the only way to overcome reasonable doubt is to have it on video. Who serves on a jury frequently enough to become accustomed to anything? I've only been mailed for jury duty a few times, and every time when I check the night before I'm waived out.

I think a more accurate way to phrase this is that potential jurors in Seattle have grown to believe etc. How does that happen? Television. They see the police pulling up surveillance videos or using high tech lab technologies on television shows and assume that these fictional techniques are the norm. See, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect

[dead]

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

#190

Post by bongoman42 »

titzer wrote: post #75
Fogest wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately that's not how society works. I don't think I can think of any society out there where this idealistic model works. Of course I'd love for that to happen, but that's just not where we are at right now, nor would it be something that could happen overnight. We have to live with what we have right now. And right now the majority of people seem to welcome this technology and have no problem with it at all.…

I guffawed at "proper checks/balances". Since ICE brownshirts have been roaming around with masks and automatic weapons, abducting random people and even shooting some, you're at "checks/balances". What?

This is largely because states will not cooperate with ICE to help identify criminals among immigrants. ICE is not an issue in states where the police are cooperating with it.
Post reply on HN