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

New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

newbedfordlight.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 102 posts

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#51

Post by infinite_spin »

jauer wrote: post #49
infinite_spin wrote: post #44

At this point I think it's necessary to notify anyone who has been tracked after a fixed number of days, unless a court order is used to extend that period. An officer using this for legitimate reasons should have few problems getting that court order. This would at least give people some amount of safety net from stalking by LE.

I think this or similar accountability measures is where we'll need to end up with this kind of technology. It's too useful for catching vehicle theft rings and similar kinds of highly disruptive criminal networks to abandon the technology entirely. LOVEINT has been a thing for as long as electronic surveillance has existed. We fire and/or prosecute people for it. We didn't turn out back on those capabilities. I'd li…

Fair point, we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, however I am fearful of a surveillance state. These trust issues seem to be stacking up, so I think statutory transparency is necessary.

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#52

Post by infinite_spin »

duxup wrote: post #3

I don't understand why a regular patrol officer would / should even have access to something like this without some level of extra authorization. They're not detectives running an open investigation ... In this case this officer was searching numerous networks over and over again, that alone should trigger some metrics that raise the question "uh ... why?"

I think they justify it as an ease of use vs security trade off

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#53

Post by aqme28 »

Walf wrote: post #41
veec_cas_tant wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t the easy reply here that there is no expectation of privacy in public, unlike in one’s home? There are tens, or more likely hundreds of millions of cameras recording outside in the United States.

It's not that simple. If you were in public, going about your business, but someone followed you around perpetually, noting down everything you did, you should feel stalked and harassed. That is exactly what these machines are doing. Being in public means that you're not hiding any one part of your behaviour, but nor are you telling everyone where you've been and where you're going, etc.

In some places, like Germany, that reasonable expectation of privacy standard extends into public. You’re not allowed to just film strangers that have nothing to do with you. In some ways, I feel like this is a better system for our future.

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#54

Post by veec_cas_tant »

Walf wrote: post #41
veec_cas_tant wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t the easy reply here that there is no expectation of privacy in public, unlike in one’s home? There are tens, or more likely hundreds of millions of cameras recording outside in the United States.

It's not that simple. If you were in public, going about your business, but someone followed you around perpetually, noting down everything you did, you should feel stalked and harassed. That is exactly what these machines are doing. Being in public means that you're not hiding any one part of your behaviour, but nor are you telling everyone where you've been and where you're going, etc.

Why should I feel stalked and harassed by the cameras though? I didn’t feel bothered at all by cameras in NYC. I didn’t feel bothered in Singapore. I drove about 12 hours over the last couple of days and didn’t feel bothered by the numerous cameras along the interstate. I would certainly feel different if followed by an actual human for sure, but cameras give me no reaction honestly.

Is it the AI? If so, why does it matter if it’s AI vs paying a team to manually track your movements on these cameras? Seems hugely inefficient.

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#55

Post by wolfi1 »

jauer wrote: post #49
infinite_spin wrote: post #44

At this point I think it's necessary to notify anyone who has been tracked after a fixed number of days, unless a court order is used to extend that period. An officer using this for legitimate reasons should have few problems getting that court order. This would at least give people some amount of safety net from stalking by LE.

I think this or similar accountability measures is where we'll need to end up with this kind of technology. It's too useful for catching vehicle theft rings and similar kinds of highly disruptive criminal networks to abandon the technology entirely. LOVEINT has been a thing for as long as electronic surveillance has existed. We fire and/or prosecute people for it. We didn't turn out back on those capabilities. I'd li…

but wouldn't such vehicle theft rings change the license plates?

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#57

Post by veec_cas_tant »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #50
veec_cas_tant wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t the easy reply here that there is no expectation of privacy in public, unlike in one’s home? There are tens, or more likely hundreds of millions of cameras recording outside in the United States.

it's not about privacy in the moment, courts have already said flock is equivalent to warrantless tracking; it's more about privacy in all time-based aspects of your life: where you go, when you go there and the multitude of second order details you can easily infer from this.

There are all kinds of law enforcement powers that do not require a warrant. Video footage is heavily volunteered as it is - they just go to your door and ask for you to send them a copy. I’m guessing the compliance rate is incredibly high, but that’s just a guess. We have cities with tens to hundreds of thousands of cameras already, not Flock but why does it matter? They can track you, but it’s fine because we need to pay $1000 per hour for a team of people to watch hours of CCTV instead of having the computer do it?

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#58

Post by Walf »

veec_cas_tant wrote: post #54
Walf wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that simple. If you were in public, going about your business, but someone followed you around perpetually, noting down everything you did, you should feel stalked and harassed. That is exactly what these machines are doing. Being in public means that you're not hiding any one part of your behaviour, but nor are you telling everyone where you've been and where you're going, etc.

Why should I feel stalked and harassed by the cameras though? I didn’t feel bothered at all by cameras in NYC. I didn’t feel bothered in Singapore. I drove about 12 hours over the last couple of days and didn’t feel bothered by the numerous cameras along the interstate. I would certainly feel different if followed by an actual human for sure, but cameras give me no reaction honestly. Is it the AI? If so, why does it…

Perhaps you'll feel differently if you, or someone you care about, happen to be one of the lucky future misidentifications.

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#59

Post by veec_cas_tant »

aqme28 wrote: post #53
Walf wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that simple. If you were in public, going about your business, but someone followed you around perpetually, noting down everything you did, you should feel stalked and harassed. That is exactly what these machines are doing. Being in public means that you're not hiding any one part of your behaviour, but nor are you telling everyone where you've been and where you're going, etc.

In some places, like Germany, that reasonable expectation of privacy standard extends into public. You’re not allowed to just film strangers that have nothing to do with you. In some ways, I feel like this is a better system for our future.

Regardless of their laws, Germany has plenty of CCTV style cameras outdoors just like NYC and other major cities worldwide.

Re: New Bedford police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track ex-partner

#60

Post by avs733 »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #48
pudgywalsh wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You never worked for a startup where the CEO demanded administrator rights to everything just because he's CEO?

patrol officer is more like a junior QA in your analogy

yeah but not in a US cops version of their place in the analogy
Post reply on HN