Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US • Hacker News Board

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#211

Post by vinceguidry » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:02 PM UTC

tandem_bike wrote: post #200

apo wrote: post #49

> The new balloons promise a cheap surveillance platform that could follow multiple cars and boats for extended periods. And because winds often travel in different directions at different altitudes, the balloons can usually hover over a given area simply by ascending or descending. Stepping back from the details of this story reveals a striking pattern that most public discussions on mass surveillance miss entirely.…

>"Cost has protected citizens of the world's liberal democracies from sliding into totalitarianism for a long time. Now the brakes are off. Surveillance technology costs are plunging across at the board and capabilities are skyrocketing." That is false. The collective political will and desire to maintain Democratic institutions, not some prohibitive cost of surveillance capabilities, is what has saved us from totali…

One thing I recall reading about actual totalitarian police states is that, sure, there's a cost imposed by the existence of the state itself, but that the lion's share of the problems caused by the system were due to bad actors, of which there were legion, but all of them had top-down supervision, meaning they couldn't just run around causing problems, the integrity of the system had to be preserved.

The people had no power, but the actual people with power had an interest in maintaining order. Things mostly sucked, but at least the 'trains ran on time', i.e. people could learn to understand and operate within the system.

Rule of law and liberal democracy ultimately means that the bad actors in society have bottom-up supervision to go along with the top-down. Bad actors aren't just watched by the police anymore, and it's not just the police that has the capacity to watch or decide who a bad actor is. And the federalism of power means that power bases spring up that are ultimately more powerful than the government when they pool their weight.

It was never about rights or privacy. It was always about who gets to decide what rules a society lives by. If the police are acquiring more power, then the people can acquire surveillance tools themselves so they can watch the watchers.

Bad cops think that body cameras are harshing their mellow? Just think what happens when some froggy judge decides to rule that it's nigh time police departments need to make their every official act available and searchable.

I bet they'll be jumping at the bit to start wanting to properly define universal privacy rights then.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#212

Post by StavrosK » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:08 PM UTC

bamboozled wrote: post #154

alex_duf wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a french person I don't see that going very well or being very effective. Now our police force (CRS) are just military and dress like robocop for any confrontation. People get hurt, the news outlets take the government side and the problems stays the same.

This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…

> But wow, it would be a very different scene.

Yeah, it would be a civil war with orders of magnitude more dead.

I don't understand the American fascination with guns. When have they ever been useful against the government?

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#213

Post by senorjazz » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:09 PM UTC

bamboozled wrote: post #154

alex_duf wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a french person I don't see that going very well or being very effective. Now our police force (CRS) are just military and dress like robocop for any confrontation. People get hurt, the news outlets take the government side and the problems stays the same.

This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…

> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms?

The chinese are slowly removing democratic institutions away from the people. The people are rising up to protect them without guns.

Democratic norms are slowly being eroded from the US as well. Extreme gerrymandering, electoral college / popular vote, overt foreign interference, requested foreign interference, voting irregularities, voter purges, voting machine irregularities, a complicit senate, out of control corporate funding / ownership / bribery of politicians.

What are the people with guns doing? Nothing. In some cases cheering it on with claims of "if your side tries anything we are armed and ready".

Does having an armed population really protect the people from the government? Does it protect a democracy? does it protect the constituion? Or is more likely they become a paramilitary wing of a corrupt government? Just look around the world and see what happens in other countries with a heavily armed population? Then tend to form groups to have power, slowly becoming war lords, which the politicians then use a power source to keep the population in check.

Maybe an armed population made sense a few hundred years ago (maybe not though), but am going to have to see some working out to show it is still relevant today before being believed as an unquestionable truth. Some examples would be good. And before everyone shouts SWITZERLAND SWITZERLAND. If you are comparing the US population to Switzerland, I think you have more homework todo as all that shows you, there is a lot more to it than just having guns.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#214

Post by inflatableDodo » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:10 PM UTC

bamboozled wrote: post #154

alex_duf wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a french person I don't see that going very well or being very effective. Now our police force (CRS) are just military and dress like robocop for any confrontation. People get hurt, the news outlets take the government side and the problems stays the same.

This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…

If America went to shit enough that people needed to take up arms to protect themselves against the government, around half of the people with guns would be on the side of the government. It would not be a battle of the people vs the state, it would be half of the people against the other half, but with only one side getting military backing (unless the miltary itself also split).

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#215

Post by base698 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:10 PM UTC

mgamache wrote: post #79

im3w1l wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> government, law enforcement The thing is when it gets cheap enough, other players start enter the game too. Companies. Criminal gangs. Or even private individuals. A situation of "if surveillance is outlawed, only outlaws will have surveillance" should be taken into account.

Not really. The FAA might have something to say about what floats around the sky. At least in the USA.

65,000 ft is above their jurisdiction.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#216

Post by close04 » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:11 PM UTC

dredmorbius wrote: post #177

maxheadroom wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. . ...but the way the U.S. laws are written, it's quite illegal to take up arms against or try to depose/overthrow the United States Government - no matter how totalitarian and authoritarian it might get. In fact, nothing in the Bill of Rights or the Consitution or the U.S. Code guarantees such right[s]. This is not to mention the reality that the arms controls…

There are (rare) cases in which armed resistance does not result in convictions, and/or in which prosecution of government agents is at least initiated, and civil redress made. The Ruby Ridge incident comes to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge As does the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_Nati...

The only way a protest with guns is different from a normal protest is if you're willing to use those guns. And using them usually doesn't end well for protesters more than anyone.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#217

Post by sokoloff » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:21 PM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #212

bamboozled wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…

> But wow, it would be a very different scene. Yeah, it would be a civil war with orders of magnitude more dead. I don't understand the American fascination with guns. When have they ever been useful against the government?

1776, 1789, 1848, 1917, and several smaller ones along the way.

The one in 1861 was ultimately not effective.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#218

Post by inflatableDodo » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:22 PM UTC

t-a4550 wrote: post #129

apo wrote: post #49

> The new balloons promise a cheap surveillance platform that could follow multiple cars and boats for extended periods. And because winds often travel in different directions at different altitudes, the balloons can usually hover over a given area simply by ascending or descending. Stepping back from the details of this story reveals a striking pattern that most public discussions on mass surveillance miss entirely.…

> “Today it's the war on drugs and terror. Tomorrow it's something else.” > “This train has one destination, and it's not even clear if there will be any stops along the way. To understand where we're headed, try reading the Bill of Rights with the assumption that your government knows everything there is to know about you, and where those who attempt to reveal the extent of these capabilities are imprisoned or execu…

>Devil’s advocate here. Who’s to say they won’t use it strictly to deter drug trafficking and terrorism?

Anyone paying reasonable attention to either current events or history?

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#219

Post by sokoloff » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:23 PM UTC

inflatableDodo wrote: post #214

bamboozled wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…

If America went to shit enough that people needed to take up arms to protect themselves against the government, around half of the people with guns would be on the side of the government. It would not be a battle of the people vs the state, it would be half of the people against the other half, but with only one side getting military backing (unless the miltary itself also split).

I think there's reasonable reason to believe that if things got to that point that the military would be likely to have split allegiance.

Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US

#220

Post by galangalalgol » Sat, Aug 03, 2019, 1:28 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #120

craftinator wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High velocity, heavy caliber hunting right with accentuated rifling, attached to a heavy servo gimble or robotic arm, telescopic lens, laser range finder. Should be able to shoot these down all day long.

A hunting rifle can reach 10-15 km altitude?

not even close, and none of this is civil disobedience. civil would be to have a movement put multispectral bright lights on top of every car boat plane train bicycle ball cap dog collar and then scatter them everywhere at intersections and parks etc. not sure how bright they would need to be to saturate enough to hide the car or dog. you could track the bright spot till they intersect but then I would be iffy to keep them apart at slow intersections I think.