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

Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 683 posts

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#651

Post by giantrobot »

protimewaster wrote: post #626
Suppafly wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>1 - vehicle wasn't involved and was about to be towed for footage as the article implies Which is definitely something that shouldn't happen and is a violation of constitutional rights.

I agree that it shouldn't happen, and it feels like it should be unconstitutional. I'm wondering if it actually is unconstitutional, though. If they got a warrant to seize the vehicle, for example, it seems like it's probably constitutional. I think?

Unconstitutional warrants are issued all the time. The only way to contest them is to fight the very legal system that granted them in the first place. Unless you're 1) rich or 2) find a very sympathetic lawyer good luck.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#652

Post by mattmanser »

urda wrote: post #610
izacus wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's so innocent about people running surveillance cameras and recording every person walking by on the street?

You have no expectation of privacy in public. Your right to seclusion or privacy does not extend to public spaces.

An outdated argument that hasn't kept up with modern technology. Previously surveillance was expensive and hard, now it's cheap and easy.

This argument was invented in modern times to justify stripping the anonymity of the crowd from the general populace and is destroying the freedom from constant surveillance we once took for granted.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#653

Post by randallsquared »

JohnFen wrote: post #647
randallsquared wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically: “What’s so innocent about having your eyes open?” If you are somewhere where you might expect that people could see you, don’t pretend that they are supposed to not see you, or to forget what they saw. Thinking ypeopleshould have that kind of control over other people’s memories, even if stored in their stuff, seems dystopian.

> Basically: “What’s so innocent about having your eyes open?” This is in no way equivalent to video recording.

There is no sharp line with modern tech, and widespread neuralink and competitors will blur it even more.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#654

Post by Suppafly »

protimewaster wrote: post #626
Suppafly wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>1 - vehicle wasn't involved and was about to be towed for footage as the article implies Which is definitely something that shouldn't happen and is a violation of constitutional rights.

I agree that it shouldn't happen, and it feels like it should be unconstitutional. I'm wondering if it actually is unconstitutional, though. If they got a warrant to seize the vehicle, for example, it seems like it's probably constitutional. I think?

Depends on how truthful they were when filling out the warrant application. Cops often lie and exaggerate on warrant applications and hope for a sympathetic judge to not ask too many questions.

In that example it's unclear why a warrant would even be needed, it was parked in a hotel parking lot and it appears that they made no effect to contact the owner before requesting the warrant. It'd be really interesting to see what their justification was for asking to seize someone's car instead of just walking inside and asking the desk clerk to call them so they could ask for the footage.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#655

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

scohesc wrote: post #632

I wonder if you're fairly compensated by the police department for your time without your vehicle, just because you told the police you don't want to give them access to your Tesla. Plus the time to go down to the station to pick your car up, because you know they're not going to courier it back to you. Plus any accidental damage done to the vehicle because an officer/towing company/whoever damages your vehicle durin…

Considering that people whose doors are broken down during a no-knock search that turns out to be the wrong address have to fix the damage out of their own pocket, I doubt it.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#656

Post by kdamica »

Definitely bad for the individual but if this is reserved for homicides, which are fairly rare, and helps solve the crimes, I’d say this is overall a good thing. There’s the potential for a slippery slope here but nothing about this seems alarming to me.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#657

Post by FireBeyond »

scohesc wrote: post #632

I wonder if you're fairly compensated by the police department for your time without your vehicle, just because you told the police you don't want to give them access to your Tesla. Plus the time to go down to the station to pick your car up, because you know they're not going to courier it back to you. Plus any accidental damage done to the vehicle because an officer/towing company/whoever damages your vehicle durin…

> I wonder if you're fairly compensated by the police department for your time without your vehicle, just because you told the police you don't want to give them access to your Tesla.

Hah. No. Police have kicked in the wrong door (wrong house, number didn't match the warrant, wasn't the correct house), set off flash bangs, shot dogs, destroyed property...

... and when the owner (who was uninvolved in whatever the warrant was about, and it wasn't even meant to be his house searched) has requested reparations or repair work from the Police Department, they've laughed...

... and when the owner has subsequently sued the Police Department, the courts have ruled that they have no obligation to pay for any damage done, including by negligence.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#658

Post by JohnFen »

randallsquared wrote: post #653
JohnFen wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically: “What’s so innocent about having your eyes open?” This is in no way equivalent to video recording.

There is no sharp line with modern tech, and widespread neuralink and competitors will blur it even more.

There is a sharp line. If I see something, what I see isn't recorded verbatim on some shareable media somewhere, nor is that data stored in a database.

> widespread neuralink

At this time, I don't see any reason to think this is a thing that neuralink or similar will be able to accomplish anytime soon. Massive video surveillance, on the other hand, is a problem that actually exists right now.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#659

Post by JohnFen »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #645
I_am_uncreative wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many cases, you're obligated to not record people in public without their permission. That's the norm, for example, in Sweden, apparently.

Do people really get permission though? Like what if you’re in some crowded area - for example taking photos of some landmark? You’re not going to be able to conceivably chase down 10+ people and get their permissions. I imagine most people just record whatever they do and upload it to their social media.

> I imagine most people just record whatever they do and upload it to their social media.

Perhaps, but at least in countries that have reasonable laws about this, anyone who finds themselves in pictures/video they didn't consent to has some method of recourse.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#660

Post by JohnFen »

al_borland wrote: post #637
JohnFen wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a great argument for not buying a Tesla, that's for sure.

It’s a great argument for avoiding any purchase that involves always-on cameras.

I agree, but it's even more important with personal transportation people rely on than most other things that might include such cameras.
Post reply on HN