Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

11. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:57 Beamer
 
RollinThundr wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:46:
Verno wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:24:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:04:
Here’s the drone the county sheriff wants to fly over your backyard.

I have no problem with this. The law says you have no expectation of privacy outside of your cartilage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtilage) - anything outside of the walls of your home is considered NOT PRIVATE. Anyone at anytime can "walk through your yard"....yea, those NO TRESPASSING signs....yea about those....

What the law says and what will happen when someone does that are two very different things. Also I don't want CCTVs and an overhead drone fleet watching my every movement, if that doesn't scream governmental abuse then I don't know what will. Instruments of control need to be applied very carefully on society as a whole, less is more.

The locals here priced it out to 8k a unit for the drones they wanted (which apparently have some form of rudimentary IR mapping) and did some "creative" budgeting to make it work, thankfully the town shut down the funding.

Now if people want to deploy drones for surgical strikes on patent trolls, that's something I can get behind

This ^ It's not like cops follow laws all the time either, just look at that Chris Dorner incident. There's no reason to have drones patrolling US skies, 1984 here we come, won't be long now, they just need to succeed in taking all the guns away first.

What did they do wrong there?
I mean, other than the shooting random people in pickup trucks, and pretty much everything else. But what, did they do that wouldn't hold up in court had they taken Dorner alive?
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:48 Verno
 
InBlack wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:35:
Beamer and Bats you are both forgetting or disregarding the leaps and bounds intelligent software is making with regards to going through mountains of data both textual and visual.

The NSA is already basically "combing" the desert with regards to internet traffic both domestic and international, and DARPA is developing blimp drones that will be able to monitor hundreds of square miles of territory up to a resolution of a few centimeters.

Manpower is not key here, smart AI like software is. And that shit is pretty damn smart already.

Agreed. I'm also really leery of the claim that "it wont be used for surveillance" and that the use will very benign overall. Once you open the door on drones it's going to be very difficult to shut it and if there aren't many tangible benefits to it then why are they bothering? If I believed for a minute they'd be just looking for drug ops and escaped fugitives I could get behind it but it will likely go much farther than that, these things always seem to. Even the use of GPS in consumer electronics has gone beyond my personal comfort level, let alone municipal/state controlled drones.

Finally it's just another level of conditioning to the technology and idea of potentially being observed as normal. I see it in friends from the UK "if you aren't doing anything wrong you don't have to worry!" from people who were staunchly against the idea before they started doing pilot projects with CCTV which then rapidly expanded. Maybe there is no reason to fear it but personally I believe you need to balance security vs privacy needs very carefully as government powers are inherently prone to abuse and we have countless examples in history to serve as a reminder.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Destiny, Fire Emblem
Watching: Continuum, Star Trek TNG, Haunt
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:46 RollinThundr
 
Verno wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:24:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:04:
Here’s the drone the county sheriff wants to fly over your backyard.

I have no problem with this. The law says you have no expectation of privacy outside of your cartilage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtilage) - anything outside of the walls of your home is considered NOT PRIVATE. Anyone at anytime can "walk through your yard"....yea, those NO TRESPASSING signs....yea about those....

What the law says and what will happen when someone does that are two very different things. Also I don't want CCTVs and an overhead drone fleet watching my every movement, if that doesn't scream governmental abuse then I don't know what will. Instruments of control need to be applied very carefully on society as a whole, less is more.

The locals here priced it out to 8k a unit for the drones they wanted (which apparently have some form of rudimentary IR mapping) and did some "creative" budgeting to make it work, thankfully the town shut down the funding.

Now if people want to deploy drones for surgical strikes on patent trolls, that's something I can get behind

This ^ It's not like cops follow laws all the time either, just look at that Chris Dorner incident. There's no reason to have drones patrolling US skies, 1984 here we come, won't be long now, they just need to succeed in taking all the guns away first.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:42 Beamer
 
InBlack wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:35:
Beamer and Bats you are both forgetting or disregarding the leaps and bounds intelligent software is making with regards to going through mountains of data both textual and visual.

The NSA is already basically "combing" the desert with regards to internet traffic both domestic and international, and DARPA is developing blimp drones that will be able to monitor hundreds of square miles of territory up to a resolution of a few centimeters.

Manpower is not key here, smart AI like software is. And that shit is pretty damn smart already.

Manpower is an issue.

We can track faces, but it will be decades before computers can identify what those faces are doing.

It's easy in Afghanistan - just try to match who is holding a gun. In the US? Much harder to see what's going on.

Again, though, I'm against this. I just don't think it's likely to be anything useful for police. This doesn't mean I don't think they'll try it, anyway, and that we should sit back and say "eh, it will never work." Screw that, we shouldn't let them try.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:35 InBlack
 
Beamer and Bats you are both forgetting or disregarding the leaps and bounds intelligent software is making with regards to going through mountains of data both textual and visual.

The NSA is already basically "combing" the desert with regards to internet traffic both domestic and international, and DARPA is developing blimp drones that will be able to monitor hundreds of square miles of territory up to a resolution of a few centimeters.

Manpower is not key here, smart AI like software is. And that shit is pretty damn smart already.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:24 Verno
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:04:
Here’s the drone the county sheriff wants to fly over your backyard.

I have no problem with this. The law says you have no expectation of privacy outside of your cartilage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtilage) - anything outside of the walls of your home is considered NOT PRIVATE. Anyone at anytime can "walk through your yard"....yea, those NO TRESPASSING signs....yea about those....

What the law says and what will happen when someone does that are two very different things. Also I don't want CCTVs and an overhead drone fleet watching my every movement, if that doesn't scream governmental abuse then I don't know what will. Instruments of control need to be applied very carefully on society as a whole, less is more.

The locals here priced it out to 8k a unit for the drones they wanted (which apparently have some form of rudimentary IR mapping) and did some "creative" budgeting to make it work, thankfully the town shut down the funding.

Now if people want to deploy drones for surgical strikes on patent trolls, that's something I can get behind
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Destiny, Fire Emblem
Watching: Continuum, Star Trek TNG, Haunt
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:24 xXBatmanXx
 
nin wrote on Feb 15, 2013, 10:08:
I have no problem with this.

Thankfully others do!


Eh, economies of scale and no reason to use it. Be so expensive it isn't worth it. Departments are having a hard time funding training, ammo, salaries, let alone toys....
 
Avatar 10714
 
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder.
Playing: New dad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:20 Beamer
 
I have no problem with sending a thermal drone into the mountains to find an armed and dangerous fugitive that has already killed.


Permanent drones flying over our homes? Don't see it happening:
1) What's the real advantage here? You'd have to have someone manning them, as it would be decades before we had AI smart enough to actually identify a crime. Decades, maybe centuries. So the amount of manpower needed is astronomical

2) On top of that, you can't use much of the technology. Cops have tried all kinds of crazy methods to see into homes. While courts have repeatedly said that cops can use helicopters without a warrant, as it isn't terribly different than sitting in a car, courts have also repeatedly said cops can't enhance their senses without a warrant. They've tried using thermal imaging and sensing devices to check the heat in homes before. The lamps used to grow marijuana are hot, so it's easy to see if a home is using them. Courts wouldn't allow it. They wouldn't allow drones to do anything similar

3) The false hit rate would probably also be astronomical, also increasing costs

So at best you have an expensive device with a man sitting somewhere using it for hours on end. And you still need cops patrolling on the ground because even if this device spots something it can't do anything about it.
I don't see a huge advantage for cops. Yeah, overzealous Sheriff's officers think it would make their lives easier, but in practice I doubt that's all that true.

Of course, it not being practical, efficient, or overly feasible won't stop people from trying. That's what courts are for.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:08 nin
 
I have no problem with this.

Thankfully others do!

 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 10:04 xXBatmanXx
 
Here’s the drone the county sheriff wants to fly over your backyard.

I have no problem with this. The law says you have no expectation of privacy outside of your cartilage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtilage) - anything outside of the walls of your home is considered NOT PRIVATE. Anyone at anytime can "walk through your yard"....yea, those NO TRESPASSING signs....yea about those....
 
Avatar 10714
 
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder.
Playing: New dad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Feb 15, 2013, 09:52 InBlack
 
US citizens will get a taste of their own medicine, like it or not, drones over friendly skies will be as common as those flying over Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Iran...etc. etc.

Orwell always thought the communist state would be the first one to turn into a big brother society boy was he wrong....
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo