"Flock" branding is unhelpful in your anti-surveillance campaign. Where I live they're getting rid of flock due to public sentiment -- and contracting with Axon instead.
There have always been cameras all over the place. Traffic cameras, wildfire cameras. Since the actual camera is doing the exact same thing as these other camera (filming in public) there is nothing illegal about them. To make them illegal would also require anyone pulling out there camera and saving a private video illegal. Look the public should assume they are always being watched. If they don't want that, stay in private areas. I would rather not just get downvoted for this unpopular opinion but debated - but with merit. We're not going anywhere if we just say boo hoo you suck and downvote. These cameras are legal (right now).
Flock does not merely sell or lease cameras, it operates them. In that respect, they are acting as an agent of the government, and hence could be seen as being party to fourth amendment violations (assuming one could successfully argue that such violations exist). Of course, first you need someone with standing to sue...
A better example would be if you are served with a restraining order by your ex-spouse, but then hire a private detective to follow them around in public.
The private detective isn't breaking any laws (assuming they're doing their job correctly and legally), but you are certainly violating your restraining order.
In many case, no, Flock is an active participant in it.
In many states, agencies can't contract with Flock to have them initiate certain data sharing (i.e. build out cameras and connectivity).
In some cases, though, if Flock "just so happens..." to have that data available, then the agency is free to contract with them, and then can have access to it - they just can't be the one to request it.
So, while yes, the agency still holds the burden, there is a lot of "nudge nudge wink wink so if we just get set up here through someone else, you could then sign a contract with us!"
We've already seen city meetings where there are cameras and no-one knows (or seems to know) who the actual agency-of-record is for a given installation.
Who's being dense? Flock is just logging data it sees in the wild. That has nothing to do with the 4th amendment. It is the cops using that data that would be any where near violating the 4th. So as stated, Flock isn't doing anything illegal. If you want it to be illegal nationally, Congress needs to get involved.
Constructive intent. These systems exists for purposes other than violating our rights in the same way that a known drug dealer has a pill press for decoration.
So here's a version that doesn't glaze airlines: it's an extension of dynamic pricing, everyone knows that prices (generally) rise as the date of the flight approaches so that airlines can get more money out of business travelers and single moms going to funerals who have inelastic demand, while vacationers with their elastic demand aren't priced out. But then how do you maximize money from vacationers? Well, some are going to have more flexibility with dates than others and you want to get the most money out of them no matter what, so you don't show how your prices change day to day (both day of flight and day of booking). Then, people with more to spend will just book whenever and the aforementioned single mother will waste hours checking various combinations daily to find a price she can afford. That's the customer that United deems "worth it", they won't book for any price higher than $50 so they add a ton of friction to force that customer to put effort into finding that price. But if anyone can overcome that friction with an AI agent, airlines lose out on that dynamic pricing signal.
in addition to corporate aircraft, drivers, physicians, security, etc... it's high time boardrooms start provisioning high-performing CEOs with concubines.
Why? I think it is the most important thing. How can you get peak performance from the men, when they physiologically stop caring about all that important for capitalization stuff when they chasing the woman?
He said concubine not slave. You have to be blind if you believe there aren't enough modern women who would be more than willing to have casual sex with a mil/billionaire for money when most of them already (try to) do that for free.
No one really cared when we were at full employment, the problem is that CS is the new liberal arts degree and it looks like it might only be getting worse.
Thats pretty insulting to the amount of effort required to obtain a CS degree.
Yes I know every po dunk college up and down the country added CS to their collection (because all you need is a computer lab so it goes in with degrees like Math, Physics etc).
CS even at lesser colleges requires sustained discipline in the maths, sciences, logic theory, and much more depending on the university.
Liberal Arts is a very different animal and while it can also be a very rigorous program for committed students, it has a greater opportunity for students to slack off and still graduate. It is much harder to hide and get through a CS program with this mentality and so it deserves more respect than you are giving it.
It's because The Experts (specifically those in the public space) made it clear that they Had Spoken and that COVID had come from a wet market. From there, any dissent was met with incredible vitriol that still lasts to this day.
Can we really? Can we really have a discussion if suggesting that COVID-19 may have come from a lab leak at a top tier virology lab doing cutting edge GoF research gets one labeled a racist?
First of all I said we didn’t have to resolve whether or not COVID-19 came from a lab in order to have a discussion of whether or not we should have bioweapons and other viral research labs.
Haha, I get where you're coming from but I still disagree. It's a question of the baseline risk, if COVID occurred naturally then there's a much higher chance of similar pandemics happening again and risky research like GoF makes sense. But if it was a lab leak, then it's harder to justify. There are other parts to if of course, if you think that covert bioweapon research is common then it probably doesn't matter.
This is the exact reason that the Lab Leak vs Natural Origin question around COVID-19 matters. If it was a Lab Leak, then we should probably be scaling these labs down and restricting what they can research. But if COVID really did come from a wet market, then the risk is probably worth it.
The balaclava thing is stupid, but you're missing the point that they're already doing something illegal. If you think anti-ebike law is stupid then that law should be repealed, not ignored.
reply