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

261–270 of 339 posts

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

#261

Post by philwelch »

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.

> The burden is never on the defendant to prove their innocence.

False. Look up "affirmative defense".

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

#263

Post by lovich »

slowhadoken wrote: post #258
lovich wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not enforcing the laws isn’t criminal in the United States, although I wish it was. The police in various jurisdictions have gone all the way to the Supreme Court to confirm that[1][2] > It’s not just me, you see it all over social media. People are grossed out by potheads. Cool, but you or anyone else being grossed out by someone’s activity doesn’t automatically rise to the level of criminality. I, and many others,…

Everything you’re saying I’ve heard a thousand times before. People tell me this kinda stuff all the time. I’m just good at predicting things. People talk in circles like you’re doing or laugh and then they see. Good luck.

If you are incorrect, you don’t have to be Nostradamus to predict that everyone else will claim you are also incorrect.

If you go through my comment history you will find that I am fully willing to declare hills I will die on and can respect the energy. All I am asking of you is a logical argument or proof.

Everything you’ve stated so far if presented as an “ought to be” argument is unimpeachable. But you’ve presented it as an “how it is” argument, which is impeachable.

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

#264

Post by philwelch »

senderista wrote: post #204
nostromo wrote: post #72

I think this is just the new normal. My car was stolen in Seattle and it was found with the person driving it when he was pulled over by police. In the car he had paperwork with his name on it, a weapon, and his work uniform in the trunk with a name badge (he was a security guard - lol) along with a neighborhood witness. Despite a mountain of evidence, the prosecutors declined to press charges because without direct…

Same, my stolen car was full of PII when it was pulled over (driver fled), and the cops couldn't have cared less. I found the thief and his girlfriend on Facebook, but decided to drop it there.

Wise decision. If you did anything to the thief, odds are the cops would have cared.

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

#265

Post by komali2 »

fragmede wrote: post #217
VohuMana wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The popularity of the ACAB meme did not exactly endear the local populace with the local police in more liberal cities.

Perhaps the police should not have earned the label if they didn't want it applied.

The problem is the police and the State are allies in the end, and the State under liberal democracy is supposed to be the mechanism by which the police are reformed / reigned in. Now you get insanities like governors sending in police and national guard to support a federal invasion force to defend a concentration camp the locals are protesting against.

https://truthout.org/articles/new-jersey-governor-acquiesces...

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

#266

Post by slowhadoken »

lovich wrote: post #263
slowhadoken wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you’re saying I’ve heard a thousand times before. People tell me this kinda stuff all the time. I’m just good at predicting things. People talk in circles like you’re doing or laugh and then they see. Good luck.

If you are incorrect, you don’t have to be Nostradamus to predict that everyone else will claim you are also incorrect. If you go through my comment history you will find that I am fully willing to declare hills I will die on and can respect the energy. All I am asking of you is a logical argument or proof. Everything you’ve stated so far if presented as an “ought to be” argument is unimpeachable. But you’ve presente…

[flagged]

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

#267

Post by awesome_dude »

philwelch wrote: post #260
awesome_dude wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a saying - if you think the data is bad because it doesn't match your narrative, go out and prove you have better data collection methods. Anecdata is well known to be problematic.

> Anecdata is well known to be problematic. Show me the data that backs that claim.

It's always been that way for me... is that not enough, you want actual data?

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

#268

Post by lovich »

slowhadoken wrote: post #266
lovich wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are incorrect, you don’t have to be Nostradamus to predict that everyone else will claim you are also incorrect. If you go through my comment history you will find that I am fully willing to declare hills I will die on and can respect the energy. All I am asking of you is a logical argument or proof. Everything you’ve stated so far if presented as an “ought to be” argument is unimpeachable. But you’ve presente…

[flagged]

Taking that as a concession since you don’t want to provide any sort of evidence or debate. Have a nice life.

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

#269

Post by rootusrootus »

hammock wrote: post #240
rootusrootus wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only true if you conform to social conservatism. Conservatives embrace authority and condone using it to enforce conformity. They only want less government when it comes to their own taxes & guns.

Everything has a tradeoff

True. But I can get no surveillance and no crime by moving to a nice suburban neighborhood, too, without getting pressured into accepting the right wing attitudes. Nice thing about suburbia is it tends to be purple, there is not much ideology being inflicted by either side.

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

#270

Post by rootusrootus »

reaperducer wrote: post #77
rootusrootus wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Get back to me when they find Samantha Guthrie. Nancy?

Probably. I don't follow it. All I know is that a high-profile person's mom got kidnapped and in spite of all the billions of dollars spent on surveillance technology in this country, she's vanished into thin air.

As I recall, she lived in a rural neighborhood of the catalina foothills where houses are far apart and set back from the trees, so the surveillance coverage even from Ring cameras was really sparse. In a regular suburban neighborhood or urban area there would probably have been a half dozen recordings of anyone coming or going to her house.
Post reply on HN