4 ms·
This isn't an excuse, but IIRC they were sold to the city as simple sensor boxes. GE (or whoever it was that made/sold these) added the surveillance capabilitie
by tomc1985 6y ago
This isn't an excuse, but IIRC they were sold to the city as simple sensor boxes. GE (or whoever it was that made/sold these) added the surveillance capabilities later, ostensibly for internal use but easily receivable via police action
- rbecker 6y agoI'm sorry, what? Doesn't a "sensor box" by definition have surveillance capabilities? The only way that sentence makes sense is if you're using some ridiculously narrow definition of "surveillance". Edit: Fair enough. But in this case, cameras and microphones were included, were they not?
- DanBC 6y agoIf it only senses light or dark it's difficult to see how that would count as surveillance.
- tolbish 6y agoThe city council was informed of their likelihood for abuse, so no that's not an excuse.
- tomc1985 6y agoAh, I wasn't aware of that bit.
- loteck 6y agoThe camera surveillance was there from the outset, SDPD just didn't realize it or start accessing the camera footage until about a year after the nodes went up.