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

301–310 of 339 posts

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

#301

Post by tsss »

jeffbee wrote: post #144
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My state recently passed a law (similar to Texas') which allows people to defend with lethal force certain property (beyond just their vehicle , which was already allowed). Tennessee-wide, it goes into effect July 1st – and is long-overdue. I live in a working-class neighborhood and we do whatever we can to keep the trouble elsewhere (i.e. not here). Wish guns didn't exist , but until they don't stay safe thugz .

What's your hypothesis on why Texas has a much higher auto theft rate than Tennessee, given that they long had the policy you seem to believe is a remedy?

Well, for one Texas has a port and a border with Mexico. Car theft is almost exclusively for export to other countries, particularly South America and Africa.

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

#302

Post by ProllyInfamous »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #171
jeffbee wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your hypothesis on why Texas has a much higher auto theft rate than Tennessee, given that they long had the policy you seem to believe is a remedy?

After adjusting for socioeconomic factors auto theft in the US is pretty much a straight gradient based on "how quickly can it be in mexico" Arizona, New Mexico and Socal have pretty high auto theft rates as well.

This would be my answer, having grown up in Texas just hours from the border.

----

Now that I live 1,000+ miles-more, inland, I definitely keep more of these opinions to myself – but decades of Texceptionalism (indoctrination, the Tejas way) definitely affects one's opinion on proximity to Mexico.

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

#303

Post by ProllyInfamous »

emodendroket wrote: post #277
jeffbee wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just wondering why this Wild West stuff seems to be neither effective, since Texas has auto theft rates well above national averages, nor necessary, considering that Florida lacks the statute and has auto theft rates well below national averages.

It doesn't work but it does let people fantasize about being allowed to shoot someone to death legally.

I have actually killed, before. Given similar circumstances: would, again. I am a free man, walking among you; they let me carry a gun, still.

Self defense ought'a be allowable, and is a deterrent (even if only "statistically" ... which it is). Recent enhancing legal protections represent the shifting tides as our economy wavers into "survival" mode – ¿perhaps a Depression 3.0? – certainly it's bleak here in the workingclasshood.

Do you have any questions for your reality shaping, this morning?

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

#304

Post by chadgpt3 »

rafram wrote: post #276
philwelch wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The burden is never on the defendant to prove their innocence. False. Look up "affirmative defense".

That's separate and has no bearing on the burden of proof, which is ALWAYS on the prosecution. It is legitimately shocking that educated Americans can be ignorant of the most basic tenet of our justice system, the presumption of innocence.

I guess no crime can ever occur then, since you can never prove it wasn't consensual?

Oh you were caught in 4k walking down the street smashing every windshield with a crowbar. But how can they prove all the car owners didn't pay you to do that for a film project?

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

#305

Post by chadgpt3 »

RickS wrote: post #21
smithkl42 wrote: post #10

I wonder what they mean by this? > The camera can have different ways of seeing encoded in it, including kinds of gazes that enforce social agreements about what kinds of behavior and people are considered “normal” The phrase "kinds of gazes" strikes me as the sort of thing that's only going to make sense to people trained in a very particular and idiosyncratic flavor of ethical critique. What a normal person sees he…

There's a PG essay related to this: https://paulgraham.com/orth.html

I wonder which opinion inspired him to write this. Given the date, maybe it was something about race politics or coronavirus.

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

#306

Post by chadgpt3 »

Bratmon wrote: post #64
shortstuffsushi wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually, I'd say this sort of comment is not really contributing much to the conversation, but in this case I agree with the sentiment. With a lot of these posts about the surveillance tech that's becoming increasingly prominent everywhere in the public, there are a lot of commenters here that seem to be of the opinion that "this is fine, as long as you have nothing to hide, there's nothing lost" - or worse in this c…

> I do not live in one of the cities that have issues with a large homeless population, so the experience is a bit lost on me That's the key experience you're missing. If you've never lived in a high-homeless/drug abuse area, you don't really understand how thoroughly draining it is on every aspect of civic life.

Well why not fix it then?!

Except you don't fix homelessness by charging all the homeless people with felonies for engaging in their hobbies (weed smoking) - you do it by working out why the housing economy is so dogshit that so many people can't get one.

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

#307

Post by chadgpt3 »

patja wrote: post #28
shermantanktop wrote: post #11

Lots of po-mo art-school language on this site about “encoding ways of seeing” and “gazes.” The content itself is somewhat interesting but imo plain language would be more accessible.

I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about statements like these which seem to assume the reader is incredibly uninformed and naive, to the point of condescension. "sends the information to a central storing place (called a database)" TIL what the word database means? "Amazon can use your purchases to know more about you using patterns." Is this news to someone? Condescending. "It might be connected to a network…

Who is the target audience? Obviously not HN. Is it right to criticise someone for not writing for HN?

Radio networks and Internet are both networks. That part is fine. It means surveillance devices either have SIM cards and connect to the cell network, or they have their own isolated radio network.

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

#308

Post by ProllyInfamous »

daedrdev wrote: post #235
esikich wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the longer you're in, the less employable you are, and are more likely to reoffend. Our prison systems do fuckall for rehabilitation because in general, the public sentiment is "lock them up and throw away the key, I hope they get raped, prison isn't supposed to be fun". Our prison systems are basically set up amplify crime. It's good for the for profit owners, and conservatives eat up the dehumanization of it…

Very few US prisons are for profit. Like I said in my other comment, some are more likely to reoffend because their prison time, but other were already more likely to reoffend, especially multiple felons who commit an extremely high percent of all crimes.

>Very few US prisons are for profit.

Just under 10% – which is certainly a minority, but still enough value that Michael Bury (Big Short investorguy) once had an entire fiscal quarter where his only net-increase positions were in for-profit prison operators.

Lots of money and facilities in private prisons, particularly in This South.

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

#309

Post by chadgpt3 »

bongoman42 wrote: post #190
titzer wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guffawed at "proper checks/balances". Since ICE brownshirts have been roaming around with masks and automatic weapons, abducting random people and even shooting some, you're at "checks/balances". What?

This is largely because states will not cooperate with ICE to help identify criminals among immigrants. ICE is not an issue in states where the police are cooperating with it.

Good old-fashioned "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" extortion. Why should a state want the federal government to just do whatever it wants within that state?

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

#310

Post by ProllyInfamous »

gottorf wrote: post #256
esikich wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the longer you're in, the less employable you are, and are more likely to reoffend. Our prison systems do fuckall for rehabilitation because in general, the public sentiment is "lock them up and throw away the key, I hope they get raped, prison isn't supposed to be fun". Our prison systems are basically set up amplify crime. It's good for the for profit owners, and conservatives eat up the dehumanization of it…

> conservatives eat up the dehumanization of it all One could argue that's really dehumanizing is the callous disregard the system displays for the victims of such repeat violent offenders.

One such violent repeat offender wrote a book about his experience helping build Leavenworth Fed while serving time at Leavenworth State – he would eventually serve additional time at this newly-constructed facility.

Warning, I am not linking to the book (it's on Amazon) because no amount of #TriggerWarning can prepare you for the mind of P - A - N - Z - R - A - M [the name of the non-fiction collection of this prisoner's personal letters].

When Mr. P was asked what made him such a monster, he wrote honestly and practically about the upbringing of a serial-killing rapist. Mr. P's EVIL puts JWGacey in the safehouse.

Post reply on HN