6 ms·

I don't think people have internalized the fact that the US gov has surveillance drones in holding patterns over most US metropolitan areas. Every time I've see

I don't think people have internalized the fact that the US gov has surveillance drones in holding patterns over most US metropolitan areas. Every time I've seen someone poke around one of those persistence ADSB/radar maps, they have gone through the stages of discovery: "What are those circles?" "Surveillance drones." "Haha, no, really, what are they? Planes circling the airport?" "No, that (points to thin circle) is a plane circling the airport. The heavy circles are surveillance drones. Really." "Uhh.... (shifts uncomfortably) so where do you want to go for lunch today?"

baconomatic 7y ago
Have an example of this? Would be interesting to see it.
- 09bjb 7y ago
  Seconded.
- danso 7y ago
  BuzzFeed News had a big feature and analysis here: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-the-skies https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-t...
- ikeyany 7y ago
  This isn't about drones, but here is an article from last year about the DoD using surveillance balloons that use radar from 65,000 ft to generate high-res images of the ground: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-government-testing-surveillance-balloons-2019-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/us-government-testing-survei...
  - jeffbee 7y ago
    It's so funny how you can whip up conspiracy theories just by adding superfluous adjectives. Instead of just saying "radar" you say "wireless radar device", as if prior radars used wires, and then you say it creates "high-resolution images using radio pulses", as if this did not apply to every radar ever built. We have been using aircraft to track vehicles since the invention of aircraft. The people and their government have a legitimate interest in doing so. Nobody has a right to go about in a vehicle anonymously and privately. https://www.modbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/bee-investigator/xqxuin/picture144963059/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/JBL%20Speed%20Sign%201 https://www.modbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/bee-inv...
    - ikeyany 7y ago
      Where did I say there was no legitimate interest to do this? I am in agreement with you in saying this surveillance is not new and is not a conspiracy.
      - jjoonathan 7y ago
        It's possible for something to be not new and not a conspiracy but also not good and not right, all at the same time.
        ikeyany 7y ago
        Then it should have been posted in technology, security, or news subreddits.
    - jjoonathan 7y ago
      We shouldn't expect the centuries old philosophical/legal/procedural balance we've crafted between investigatory powers and personal rights to remain valid and correct in the face of a 99.999% decrease in the cost of surveillance and corresponding explosion in scope. Naturally, authorities didn't object to the technological expansion of their power. It's up to us to figure out if/when/how to push back. Step zero is admitting that it actually happened, admitting that we should reset our heuristics, and calling out the ludicrous argument "this is how it's always been," because, well it isn't.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
- Datenstrom 7y ago
  Not a map but it being done openly in Baltimore. https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-police-spy-plane-lawsuit-20200424-2ncxogcqr5akjjfd2fvaotvnby-story.html https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-c...
- fossuser 7y ago
  This book is the best source on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/Eyes-Sky-Secret-Gorgon-Stare/dp/0544972007 https://www.amazon.com/Eyes-Sky-Secret-Gorgon-Stare/dp/05449...
- jmwilson 7y ago
  There are twitter bot accounts that post live when they detect aircraft flying in circles: @SkyCirclesSF @SkyCirclesLA @SkyCirclesDC
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
MiroF 7y ago
I don't think people really think about it. Another example: most cities have systems that can pinpoint a gunshot to a block radius anywhere in the city so that police can respond quickly.
- renewiltord 7y ago
  It's funny. I remember a court case where Shotspotter had a pinprick on one block and the news said "the shooting actually occurred a block away". Haha, that's nuts. Crazy accurate. The expert testimony did have the engineer saying "The accuracy is invented by sales and marketing. The pinpoint is just a starting point. It's in a radius around that." Which I found amusing because it seemed obvious to me. It did improve my ability to sell, though. These caveats are useless when you're selling. You can always explain afterwards.
- m-ee 7y ago
  Oakland has shotspotter and my understanding is that it's been considered a failure
  - MiroF 7y ago
    Really? Why? In DC, I think it's been pretty successful because lots of gunshots do not result in police calls.
    - m-ee 7y ago
      Looking into it more it's less clear than I remembered. OPD considered scrapping it in 2014 saying the costs weren't justified and they'd rather have more money for their helicopter. Other cities have said they're not confident in its effectiveness but that doesn't seem to be a large factor here. They ended up keeping it. https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Oakland-cops-aim-to-scrap-gunfire-detecting-5316060.php https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Oakland-cops-aim-to-scr...
    - fapjacks 7y ago
      This is an interesting system. I have worked with this technology on large and small scales, and it's a lot less accurate than you'd think. You have no hope of sending a police cruiser to check out a single gunshot based on the outputs of this system. But a single gunshot won't generate a police call in many cities as it is, so no change there. But a gang war? Sure, that will get the phone lines going and also generate many data points to help pinpoint the location using this system. So many factors affect the speed of sound through air, that the problem becomes one of those logarithmic "How many more microphones do you want to install to eke out this tiny bit of accuracy?" kinds of things. I'm not sure it's useful to point to what cities are saying about it, either. The technology itself is a Hard Problem, but I'm also 100% sure many law enforcement bureaucrats will use any excuse to keep money flowing into their budgets, even if the money is earmarked for something that doesn't work (or doesn't work well).

baconomatic 7y ago

Have an example of this? Would be interesting to see it.

09bjb 7y ago
Seconded.
danso 7y ago
BuzzFeed News had a big feature and analysis here: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-the-skies https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-t...
ikeyany 7y ago
This isn't about drones, but here is an article from last year about the DoD using surveillance balloons that use radar from 65,000 ft to generate high-res images of the ground: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-government-testing-surveillance-balloons-2019-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/us-government-testing-survei...
- jeffbee 7y ago
  It's so funny how you can whip up conspiracy theories just by adding superfluous adjectives. Instead of just saying "radar" you say "wireless radar device", as if prior radars used wires, and then you say it creates "high-resolution images using radio pulses", as if this did not apply to every radar ever built. We have been using aircraft to track vehicles since the invention of aircraft. The people and their government have a legitimate interest in doing so. Nobody has a right to go about in a vehicle anonymously and privately. https://www.modbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/bee-investigator/xqxuin/picture144963059/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/JBL%20Speed%20Sign%201 https://www.modbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/bee-inv...
  - ikeyany 7y ago
    Where did I say there was no legitimate interest to do this? I am in agreement with you in saying this surveillance is not new and is not a conspiracy.
    - jjoonathan 7y ago
      It's possible for something to be not new and not a conspiracy but also not good and not right, all at the same time.
      - ikeyany 7y ago
        Then it should have been posted in technology, security, or news subreddits.
  - jjoonathan 7y ago
    We shouldn't expect the centuries old philosophical/legal/procedural balance we've crafted between investigatory powers and personal rights to remain valid and correct in the face of a 99.999% decrease in the cost of surveillance and corresponding explosion in scope. Naturally, authorities didn't object to the technological expansion of their power. It's up to us to figure out if/when/how to push back. Step zero is admitting that it actually happened, admitting that we should reset our heuristics, and calling out the ludicrous argument "this is how it's always been," because, well it isn't.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
Datenstrom 7y ago
Not a map but it being done openly in Baltimore. https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-police-spy-plane-lawsuit-20200424-2ncxogcqr5akjjfd2fvaotvnby-story.html https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-c...
fossuser 7y ago
This book is the best source on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/Eyes-Sky-Secret-Gorgon-Stare/dp/0544972007 https://www.amazon.com/Eyes-Sky-Secret-Gorgon-Stare/dp/05449...
jmwilson 7y ago
There are twitter bot accounts that post live when they detect aircraft flying in circles: @SkyCirclesSF @SkyCirclesLA @SkyCirclesDC
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

MiroF 7y ago

I don't think people really think about it. Another example: most cities have systems that can pinpoint a gunshot to a block radius anywhere in the city so that police can respond quickly.

renewiltord 7y ago
It's funny. I remember a court case where Shotspotter had a pinprick on one block and the news said "the shooting actually occurred a block away". Haha, that's nuts. Crazy accurate. The expert testimony did have the engineer saying "The accuracy is invented by sales and marketing. The pinpoint is just a starting point. It's in a radius around that." Which I found amusing because it seemed obvious to me. It did improve my ability to sell, though. These caveats are useless when you're selling. You can always explain afterwards.
m-ee 7y ago
Oakland has shotspotter and my understanding is that it's been considered a failure
- MiroF 7y ago
  Really? Why? In DC, I think it's been pretty successful because lots of gunshots do not result in police calls.
  - m-ee 7y ago
    Looking into it more it's less clear than I remembered. OPD considered scrapping it in 2014 saying the costs weren't justified and they'd rather have more money for their helicopter. Other cities have said they're not confident in its effectiveness but that doesn't seem to be a large factor here. They ended up keeping it. https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Oakland-cops-aim-to-scrap-gunfire-detecting-5316060.php https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Oakland-cops-aim-to-scr...
  - fapjacks 7y ago
    This is an interesting system. I have worked with this technology on large and small scales, and it's a lot less accurate than you'd think. You have no hope of sending a police cruiser to check out a single gunshot based on the outputs of this system. But a single gunshot won't generate a police call in many cities as it is, so no change there. But a gang war? Sure, that will get the phone lines going and also generate many data points to help pinpoint the location using this system. So many factors affect the speed of sound through air, that the problem becomes one of those logarithmic "How many more microphones do you want to install to eke out this tiny bit of accuracy?" kinds of things. I'm not sure it's useful to point to what cities are saying about it, either. The technology itself is a Hard Problem, but I'm also 100% sure many law enforcement bureaucrats will use any excuse to keep money flowing into their budgets, even if the money is earmarked for something that doesn't work (or doesn't work well).