US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters' • Hacker News Board

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#21

Post by CoryG89 » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:49 PM UTC

niftich wrote: post #12

If you're interested, a very similar article, from Ars Technica, was posted yesterday. We had a discussion on it at [1]. Geofeedia has since posted a response [2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12688548 [2] http://blog.geofeedia.com/a-commitment-to-freedom-of-speech-...

Thanks. I read the Ars article yesterday, but hadn't seen the response from Geofeedia.

I don't really buy that they have adequate safeguards against the police using this data inappropriately. Seems like a bold claim to me and requires further explanation. In the Ars story, they allege that as many as 500 different police departments across the country are using their data.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#22

Post by vkou » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:53 PM UTC

mason240 wrote: post #5

It seems reasonable at time when "protesting" means shutting down infrastructure.

If a protest doesn't inconvenience anyone, why would the powers that be pay attention to it?

"Shut up, go home, you live in a democracy, so complain at the ballot box" isn't a civilized response to a protest issue. When it's used to justify tyranny of the majority, it is borderline fascism.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#23

Post by vkou » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:57 PM UTC

mason240 wrote: post #16

crazypyro wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a long history of blocking crucial infrastructure during civil unrest and protesting. Its used as a tactic because its effective. Nothing about it is new or specific to today's society. How does that justify potentially infringing upon the protected rights of the protestors?

> Its used as a tactic because its effective. So are armed mobs that murder political opponents. Might does not equal right. People have a right to protest. They don't have a right to destroy property that doesn't belong them. They don't have the right to circumvent democracy and infringing upon the rights of everyone else by shutting down infrastructure that belongs to the all people.

De-facto, might almost certainly means right.

Most protests happen because the government uses physical force, or the threat of physical force to infringe upon the rights of its constituents.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#24

Post by CoryG89 » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:04 PM UTC

mason240 wrote: post #16

crazypyro wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a long history of blocking crucial infrastructure during civil unrest and protesting. Its used as a tactic because its effective. Nothing about it is new or specific to today's society. How does that justify potentially infringing upon the protected rights of the protestors?

> Its used as a tactic because its effective. So are armed mobs that murder political opponents. Might does not equal right. People have a right to protest. They don't have a right to destroy property that doesn't belong them. They don't have the right to circumvent democracy and infringing upon the rights of everyone else by shutting down infrastructure that belongs to the all people.

I agree that protestors have no right to destroy property that doesn't belong to them.

I don't agree that the police should be expected to confront protestors just because they shut down an interstate. You have no basic human right to not be inconvenienced at all by non-violent protestors. Non-violent protests that happen to shut down an interstate at some point should not be met with riot shields and swat teams.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#25

Post by Paul-ish » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:15 PM UTC

What is special about these feeds? The Facebook data was only publicly available data; ie stuff I could get by going to the right page in by browser. Was it the same with twitter? Why is it bad for a government to aggregate public data? Not just public data, but messages I assume the writers intend to be broadcast to the world. Were not talking about private emails or messages here.

I'm not trying to defend what is happening in a lot of areas with the police, I am just genuinely curious about the nature and potential for impact of these feeds.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#26

Post by Karunamon » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:17 PM UTC

CoryG89 wrote: post #24

mason240 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its used as a tactic because its effective. So are armed mobs that murder political opponents. Might does not equal right. People have a right to protest. They don't have a right to destroy property that doesn't belong them. They don't have the right to circumvent democracy and infringing upon the rights of everyone else by shutting down infrastructure that belongs to the all people.

I agree that protestors have no right to destroy property that doesn't belong to them. I don't agree that the police should be expected to confront protestors just because they shut down an interstate. You have no basic human right to not be inconvenienced at all by non-violent protestors. Non-violent protests that happen to shut down an interstate at some point should not be met with riot shields and swat teams.

We're going to disagree on that because the alternative is a breakdown in the rule of law. If you're going to block a major thoroughfare, you should expect police response (it's illegal for a good reason), and that response to escalate if you don't cooperate.

You don't get an exception to law to harass hundreds, possibly thousands of innocent people just because you feel put upon.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#27

Post by ryandrake » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

throwawayReply wrote: post #20

ryandrake wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there was some way to not voluntarily post all one's personal data and activities online.

Much of it isn't voluntary. People are sold a phone to which they provide some details including social media logins and install some apps. They then carry their phone around with them not realizing that the phone is automatically uploading it's location to various services. If you were to poll people, "Does having Facebook installed imply your location will be broadcast to Facebook 24/7?", I think you might be surpr…

Yea--I would love to live in a world where we aren't all forced to have "social media logins" in the first place!

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#28

Post by Twirrim » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:24 PM UTC

Unless I'm missing something, and I may be, this is relying on the geotagging information you include in tweets, something you can control. I'm not sure I see much advantage in having your location broadcast every time you tweet.

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#29

Post by slucidi » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:51 PM UTC

Twirrim wrote: post #28

Unless I'm missing something, and I may be, this is relying on the geotagging information you include in tweets, something you can control. I'm not sure I see much advantage in having your location broadcast every time you tweet.

Geotagging is something that tends to be on by default, and lots of people aren't aware they can shut it off. (or that it's happening in the first place)

Re: US startup Geofeedia 'allowed police to track protesters'

#30

Post by jwtadvice » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 5:51 PM UTC

HillaryBriss wrote: post #4

in any case, it's probably best to assume police and other government agencies can access your social network data. the ACLU may well win a million court cases, but the data is out there. i don't see an effective way to stop police, as individuals, or as small independently organized groups, from accessing this sort of data, whether legally or illegally. someone will find a way to get that information to the police i…

> it's probably best to assume police and other government agencies can access your social network data.

A hundred times over. Your social media posts are included in both your credit score and the criminal risk score algorithms used by police to prioritize covert civilian investigations.

The ACLU has spoken pretty powerfully on the use of police risk scoring algorithms and individualized data tracking, but it's the wave of the future with states and municipalities being pressured and incentivized by federal police to adopt the technologies and practices. IIRC it's close to a hundred US cities now that have official per-citizen social media and data surveillance feeds?