241–250 of 277 posts
Well it's obvious then that if it's helping to deport illegals, then keep going!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were co-operating/conspiring with CBP as an extension of the federal government. Most likely the feds said they will tie up whoever challenges them in federal court. They can play jurisdiction fuck fuck games and then flip between it being a search, it being necessary for safety, that the city/county was obstruction a federal investigation, and all other nonsense. Don't think your company could just put up camer…
> Most likely the feds said they will tie up whoever challenges them in federal court. They can play jurisdiction fuck fuck games and then flip between it being a search, it being necessary for safety, that the city/county was obstruction a federal investigation, and all other nonsense. This sounds like some sort of legal procedures adopted from the USSR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're reading the wrong lesson from this. If someone cares enough to take you down, your strategy isn't just useless, it's actively harming you. It's a "for my friends everything, for my enemies the law" situation. A better lesson is that you can be "on the radar" but far enough from the central hotspot that you are not a priority. Alternatively you need someone to have your back and be your heatshield while…
The actual takeaway here is the newly formed Soviet United States of America.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> “Flock unlawfully made data collected within Evanston and the State of Illinois available to federal agencies,” Ruggie wrote, referencing the findings of Giannoulias’ audit. “This is not a procedural error; it is an intentional and unauthorized disclosure of protected data… Let it be absolutely clear: this breach is material, intentional, and cannot be cured. The City will not entertain remediation efforts or reneg…
This is so abundantly hilarious to read. Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. It'd be like if I was sentenced to a Federal pentitiary, reported in to serve my sentence and was then found guilty of collaboration with the Federal government in some state court. Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena…
The “Feds asked nicely” doesn’t change the law. I worked for a company that processed state income tax data. Improper disclosure was a felony punishable by 5 years in prison.
Regulating interstate commerce doesn’t give the content the power to renegotiate state contracts or dismiss state law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an ex-employee of Flock, I can guarantee that this most likely came from the top down. The founder has a vision that isn't just aspirational, but literal, in his eyes, "Flock should help eliminate all crime." Very much Minority Report. He sees Flock as the unsung heroes of the community, and any collateral damage is an acceptable price to pay, despite lip service being paid to ethics: For example, their "suspiciou…
Why would you work for such a fucked up dystopian Orwellian corporation? Appreciate any other insider details you have to share.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This mode of operation is completely the reverse of my country the Netherlands. In Dutch society it doesn't really matter who the current ruling party is the big machine keeps rolling on. The names change frequently- governments keep tumbling down- but every day like clockwork people get up in the morning, go to work and follow their programming. Prime minister A is replaced by prime minister B. In some ways having a…
That's actually comparing two collectives: 1. A collective where there is a belief (however slow or stodgy) in the consistent application of known rules. 2. A collective where the only real rule is to make the cult leader happy even if it means a forest of contradictions and rewriting history. While (2) can easily change on a whim... it's not your whim. Which leads us to the practical question: Which collective do yo…
This sounds terrible. Any political system can be good or bad, but some of them are much more prone to autocratic drift than others. There should be absolutely no hesitation: rule of law is much better than personal dictatorship. It is not sufficient because the law can be oppressive, but it is absolutely necessary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> “Flock unlawfully made data collected within Evanston and the State of Illinois available to federal agencies,” Ruggie wrote, referencing the findings of Giannoulias’ audit. “This is not a procedural error; it is an intentional and unauthorized disclosure of protected data… Let it be absolutely clear: this breach is material, intentional, and cannot be cured. The City will not entertain remediation efforts or reneg…
This is so abundantly hilarious to read. Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. It'd be like if I was sentenced to a Federal pentitiary, reported in to serve my sentence and was then found guilty of collaboration with the Federal government in some state court. Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena…
It’s yet another constitutional crisis. There is nothing hilarious in that. On what ground should random federal agents be able to coerce companies to ignore state laws? Or federal law in a bunch of well-known, high profile cases?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's actually comparing two collectives: 1. A collective where there is a belief (however slow or stodgy) in the consistent application of known rules. 2. A collective where the only real rule is to make the cult leader happy even if it means a forest of contradictions and rewriting history. While (2) can easily change on a whim... it's not your whim. Which leads us to the practical question: Which collective do yo…
> I think a majority of the time I'd rather be opposed to (1) This sounds terrible. Any political system can be good or bad, but some of them are much more prone to autocratic drift than others. There should be absolutely no hesitation: rule of law is much better than personal dictatorship. It is not sufficient because the law can be oppressive, but it is absolutely necessary.
If someone says: "Between catching Tuberculosis or AIDS, I'd rather be fighting Tuberculosis", that does not mean they have a favorable opinion towards AIDS.
That city should just make it legal that the citizens can paintball or spray those cameras anytime and anywhere.
This will escalate - every new car on the road comes with a bevy of cheap cameras integrated - I get 360 degree views when backing up from my 2018 Chevy Bolt. It's really only a matter of time before license plate scanning computers get integrated - there's already a cellular modem integrated into the vehicle - I don't use or pay for that feature, but it's an opportunity.