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

Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

ipvm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 382 posts

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#221

Post by Planktonne »

superultra wrote: post #131
wil421 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Prior to flock, my city trialed LPRs attached to the local power company’s poles. In the first month, they recovered more stolen cars than any prior years total recoveries. I’ve got mixed feelings about Flock, LPRs, and what it allows people and governments to do. I’m 100% sold on the results.

So, ends justifies the means. Got it. I guess I’m old enough to remember when 99.9% of us on hacker news were…well, hackers. We valued privacy and freedom over surveillance and “results.” I miss those days.

HN has always been associated with tech entrepreneurship rather than 'hacker' in the way that it's commonly used.

I'm not sure there was ever a time when 99.9% of the userbase, or even a much smaller percentage, actually valued privacy and freedom rather than seeing them as obstacles to value extraction.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#222

Post by Gigachad »

ACCount37 wrote: post #217
Gigachad wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long sentences are far less effective than reliable enforcement. Something that seems to be very true in practice. If you steal or vandalise something in China, there is an extremely high chance you will get caught, you won't get a massive penalty, but it will be enough to cover the damages + some. If you for example knew that stealing had a penalty of 100% of the item value + 10% fine, with a 100% chance of getting…

Long sentences and reliable enforcement are complimentary. If you can reliably prosecute the repeat offenders you catch, and put them behind bars for a long time? You stop them from committing more crimes. The crime rate falls, and the amount of enforcement manpower you have available per crime rises. Making it easier to catch and prosecute the remaining offenders. Most of the low level crime isn't done by "a dumb de…

For violent crime sure. But for theft if you can just consistently recover the loss + a penalty it will do so much more to discourage it than simply raising the penalty.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#223

Post by wahnfrieden »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #190
ultrarunner wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle There are still quite a few people who think the police are the friendly government-provided customer service agents of life, although I've watched this viewpoint decline markedly over the last twenty years at least. Locally, a woman went on a hiking date with a Phoenix cop and wound up dead [0]. Notably, the woman was from New Eng…

[flagged]

No, it is just one HNer's random comment

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#224

Post by Planktonne »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #83
willis936 wrote: post #4

Check your town's website for correspondence with your state's chapter of the ACLU in regards to Flock cameras. If your police chief (not an elected official) is installing them then contact your local ACLU chapter about it. These are 4th amendment violations.

Yes. Let's restrict police and take away every possible tool they can use to solve and fight crime. Not all criminals are bad criminals. They don't use Flock to spy on their ex-girlfriends but every cop in America has done it. At least according to the internet which knows everything.

> take away every possible tool they can use to solve and fight crime

Flock is a new tool, with a string of related abuses already and an unconvincing record of successes. Removing it is in no way tantamount to taking away every possible tool.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#225

Post by M95D »

tptacek wrote: post #182
boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

This is an extremely online belief. Oak Park, IL, the inner-ring suburb of Chicago where I live, is almost certainly one of the 10 most progressive and left-leaning municipalities in the country. Oak Parkers (not me) have the opposite concern: we're below our threshold number of sworn officers, and desperate to add more. The median Oak Parker has very positive views of the police (and also all the standard progressiv…

Don't talk to the police - advice given to university students by a lawyer and then by a cop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

If this isn't trustworthy, I don't know what is.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#226

Post by qmr »

boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

If I pivot to law enforcement does my wife have to stop talking to me?

She's a permanent resident and has already been given the do not talk to the police speech and role play practice from me.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#227

Post by qmr »

M95D wrote: post #225
tptacek wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an extremely online belief. Oak Park, IL, the inner-ring suburb of Chicago where I live, is almost certainly one of the 10 most progressive and left-leaning municipalities in the country. Oak Parkers (not me) have the opposite concern: we're below our threshold number of sworn officers, and desperate to add more. The median Oak Parker has very positive views of the police (and also all the standard progressiv…

Don't talk to the police - advice given to university students by a lawyer and then by a cop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE If this isn't trustworthy, I don't know what is.

Isn't his follow up "be extremely careful when talking to the police"? He gave a follow up lecture some years later.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#228

Post by kakacik »

ultrarunner wrote: post #177
boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

> Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle There are still quite a few people who think the police are the friendly government-provided customer service agents of life, although I've watched this viewpoint decline markedly over the last twenty years at least. Locally, a woman went on a hiking date with a Phoenix cop and wound up dead [0]. Notably, the woman was from New Eng…

A female high on meth gets disoriented and dies from heat exposure in the mountains. As per article she willingly separated from the guy whom she sent to the top of the peak "to continue to get pic for social media". He probably should have know better and just go down with her and call it a day, or not getting high on meth in dangerous environment in the first place but thats about it.

Unless you have a better article on that, that really ain't evidence of anything.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#229

Post by M95D »

qmr wrote: post #227
M95D wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't talk to the police - advice given to university students by a lawyer and then by a cop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE If this isn't trustworthy, I don't know what is.

Isn't his follow up "be extremely careful when talking to the police"? He gave a follow up lecture some years later.

I didn't see that. Link?

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#230

Post by jillesvangurp »

Warrants are needed, and much more transparency. These platforms should be monitored and policed aggressively to keep everybody honest. There's a precedent for this with for example body cam footage means it's now much easier to audit police conduct.

Surveillance technology potentially enables a lot of abuse if used without checks and balances. But the same technology also enables monitoring for abuse. Use of surveillance technology should be actively monitored and supervised. There should be auditable logs, footage, etc. with very long retention periods and active spot checks. In case of conflicts/abuse, there should be ample evidence.

Post reply on HN