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

331–339 of 339 posts

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

#331

Post by awesome_dude »

verisimi wrote: post #330
awesome_dude wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's weird - where can you point to me having any such trust?

I'm presuming that is the case, because you are questioning my straightforward and obvious suggestion that funding by corporations can provide whatever statistics you like. Feel free to explain your actual position if you want.

Thank you for admitting your logic has no basis in fact - which was clearly your approach when looking at your rejection of data.

Let me know when you are actually interested in science, facts, or logic.

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

#332

Post by verisimi »

awesome_dude wrote: post #331
verisimi wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm presuming that is the case, because you are questioning my straightforward and obvious suggestion that funding by corporations can provide whatever statistics you like. Feel free to explain your actual position if you want.

Thank you for admitting your logic has no basis in fact - which was clearly your approach when looking at your rejection of data. Let me know when you are actually interested in science, facts, or logic.

You are putting words in my mouth. And not answering anything.

I made a statement, have defended it, asked your position, and in order to sign off with a bad faith message you put words in my mouth (that I admitted my logic has no basis in fact).

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

#333

Post by SauntSolaire »

RIMR wrote: post #196
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…

This is such a strange reactionary take to blame Seattle jurors for this. I agree that this should have resulted in charges, but every cop in Seattle wears a body camera. Even if your theory was correct (it isn't), they would actually have video evidence of this person driving your car without an explanation after you reported it stolen. I suspect that there is more to this story that either you don't know, or you ar…

That's footage of them driving it, not footage of them stealing it.

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

#334

Post by awesome_dude »

verisimi wrote: post #332
awesome_dude wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for admitting your logic has no basis in fact - which was clearly your approach when looking at your rejection of data. Let me know when you are actually interested in science, facts, or logic.

You are putting words in my mouth. And not answering anything. I made a statement, have defended it, asked your position, and in order to sign off with a bad faith message you put words in my mouth (that I admitted my logic has no basis in fact).

I presumed based on your complete and utter disregard for facts, logic, and scientific data, that it was all you understood, and it appears i was correct.

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

#335

Post by verisimi »

awesome_dude wrote: post #334
verisimi wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are putting words in my mouth. And not answering anything. I made a statement, have defended it, asked your position, and in order to sign off with a bad faith message you put words in my mouth (that I admitted my logic has no basis in fact).

I presumed based on your complete and utter disregard for facts, logic, and scientific data, that it was all you understood, and it appears i was correct.

"Presumed". Awesome, dude.

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

#336

Post by awesome_dude »

verisimi wrote: post #335
awesome_dude wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I presumed based on your complete and utter disregard for facts, logic, and scientific data, that it was all you understood, and it appears i was correct.

"Presumed". Awesome, dude.

"I'm presuming that is the case" - Veri lami

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

#337

Post by ProllyInfamous »

emodendroket wrote: post #318
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any parent would have been proud of what I've accomplished. Do you actually have any questions, or just angry ?

No, I don't have any questions, nor did I ever claim to. Fishing for questions was your idea.

I have a question for you: were somebody about to abduct your [hypothetical?] child/wife, would you consider use of lethal force to prevent such aforementioned tragedy (whether by yourself, or by a third-party [e.g: police])?

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

#338

Post by mannanj »

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #247
mannanj wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe it is the land of the free, and its the ones acting the most unfree (and resigning to their agency and sense of empowerment) and pretending to strongly proclaim everyone else isn't free that are ruining it for others? For example, you have a right to bear arms. Peaceful protests, with guns, are a historically great way to remind those in power that the power comes with duty and obligation to protect the peop…

Peaceful protests, with guns, are a historically great way to remind those in power that the power comes with duty and obligation to protect the people. That worked out great for Alex Pretti.

According to what I've read, Alex stepped in between an altercation with a woman and an agent. He physically inserted himself into a situation with law enforcement; thats different from what I'm saying.

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

#339

Post by philwelch »

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.

The prosecution has the burden of proof to establish the basic accusation, and the defendant is always entitled to offer the negative defense of "I didn't do it". For instance, if I'm accused of killing Paul, I can always say "I didn't kill Paul" and the prosecution has the burden of proof to say that I did. On the other hand, if my defense is that I killed Paul in self defense, the burden of proof is on me to show that my actions satisfied the legal definition of self defense in my state.
Post reply on HN