3 ms·

I assume you're not in a minority regularly persecuted by the police?

by gregoryl 6y ago

azinman2 6y ago
Presumably this is to catch recorded crime, versus pestering random people out of the blue?
- nitrogen 6y ago
  The people who stole my old startup's hardware prototypes and thousands of dollars of electronics from a storage unit were recorded. Didn't help.
aero-glide2 6y ago
Isn't this opt-in though? i.e you can choose not to share
- midasuni 6y ago
  Your neighbour who has “nothing to hide” opts in. Their camera points directly at your property (after all you’re dodgy - come and go at all times of night, “don’t fit in” (nothing to do with black skin), etc.
  - ryan_j_naughton 6y ago
    Totally valid point but I'm also conflicted here. I live in Washington DC where crime definitely happens (there was a double shooting 150 feet from my house 3 weeks ago). I have cameras installed so I can monitor my house along with an alarm system. My cameras are angled so as to preserve my privacy (e.g. no cameras inside the house) although they do capture anytime someone enters or leaves my house. My backyard camera captures several other people's front porches and I've thought about that as I have no interest in capturing their front porch and monitoring them. I have drawn my polygons for the event captures to only trigger if some one enters my yard. That being said, the city of DC has a program where if you register your camera with them so they know where they are and you have 2 days of 24/7 recording history, then they will reimburse cameras up to $500 total. [1] I just signed up for that rebate program as $500 is $500. Free money. And honestly if my camera would have been setup and registered with them prior that that shooting earlier this month, I would have happily given them that footage to aid their investigation. But again, I have no interest in spying on my neighbors. So how could this be resolved so this data doesn't proliferate in usage by the police for minor crimes but is still available for serious crimes. If someone breaks into my house, I definitely want their face to be on camera. [1] https://ovsjg.dc.gov/page/private-security-camera-rebate-program https://ovsjg.dc.gov/page/private-security-camera-rebate-pro...
    - midasuni 6y ago
      If I have a camera with evidence of a crime is probably give it to the police. That’s different from the police going straight to amazon, and different to the police giving free doorbells to people For police to install a cctv camera requires a due process and safeguards against misuse. They can bypass this by using private cameras - but to actually pay for them is a massive abuse.
      - ryan_j_naughton 6y ago
        The city paying for the cameras doesn't give them the right to the footage whenever they want. The footage is still private and they have no easier access system. Instead, the value is (1) I'm required to have at least two days of 24/7 recording history on the cameras and (2) they now know where these cameras are and the direction that face. Thus, if a crime happens, they can come subpoena the footage. Simply knowing that there might be footage that could help solve a crime is super helpful to the police. But they don't get automatic access or anything of the sort.
    - detaro 6y ago
      > My backyard camera captures several other people's front porches Many cameras also have features to block out private areas entirely (since that's required in many places).
throwawaysea 6y ago
Minorities aren’t “regularly” persecuted by police. You need to define what “regularly” means and show your evidence if you want to make such a hyperbolic claim. Criminals are regularly persecuted by police, however. It happens to be that some demographic groups have higher crime rates and therefore have more frequent police interactions. And if they choose to resist the police or refuse their lawful orders, bad things will happen. But keep in mind the police have hundreds of millions of interactions with people each year. The number that end tragically due to an unjust application of policing (like the Philando Castile case) are incredibly rare. And in case you aren’t aware, black Americans want more policing not less, so don’t speak for them as a white person: https://news.gallup.com/poll/316571/black-americans-police-retain-local-presence.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/316571/black-americans-police-r...

I assume you're not in a minority regularly persecuted by the police?

azinman2 6y ago

Presumably this is to catch recorded crime, versus pestering random people out of the blue?

nitrogen 6y ago
The people who stole my old startup's hardware prototypes and thousands of dollars of electronics from a storage unit were recorded. Didn't help.

aero-glide2 6y ago

Isn't this opt-in though? i.e you can choose not to share

midasuni 6y ago
Your neighbour who has “nothing to hide” opts in. Their camera points directly at your property (after all you’re dodgy - come and go at all times of night, “don’t fit in” (nothing to do with black skin), etc.
- ryan_j_naughton 6y ago
  Totally valid point but I'm also conflicted here. I live in Washington DC where crime definitely happens (there was a double shooting 150 feet from my house 3 weeks ago). I have cameras installed so I can monitor my house along with an alarm system. My cameras are angled so as to preserve my privacy (e.g. no cameras inside the house) although they do capture anytime someone enters or leaves my house. My backyard camera captures several other people's front porches and I've thought about that as I have no interest in capturing their front porch and monitoring them. I have drawn my polygons for the event captures to only trigger if some one enters my yard. That being said, the city of DC has a program where if you register your camera with them so they know where they are and you have 2 days of 24/7 recording history, then they will reimburse cameras up to $500 total. [1] I just signed up for that rebate program as $500 is $500. Free money. And honestly if my camera would have been setup and registered with them prior that that shooting earlier this month, I would have happily given them that footage to aid their investigation. But again, I have no interest in spying on my neighbors. So how could this be resolved so this data doesn't proliferate in usage by the police for minor crimes but is still available for serious crimes. If someone breaks into my house, I definitely want their face to be on camera. [1] https://ovsjg.dc.gov/page/private-security-camera-rebate-program https://ovsjg.dc.gov/page/private-security-camera-rebate-pro...
  - midasuni 6y ago
    If I have a camera with evidence of a crime is probably give it to the police. That’s different from the police going straight to amazon, and different to the police giving free doorbells to people For police to install a cctv camera requires a due process and safeguards against misuse. They can bypass this by using private cameras - but to actually pay for them is a massive abuse.
    - ryan_j_naughton 6y ago
      The city paying for the cameras doesn't give them the right to the footage whenever they want. The footage is still private and they have no easier access system. Instead, the value is (1) I'm required to have at least two days of 24/7 recording history on the cameras and (2) they now know where these cameras are and the direction that face. Thus, if a crime happens, they can come subpoena the footage. Simply knowing that there might be footage that could help solve a crime is super helpful to the police. But they don't get automatic access or anything of the sort.
  - detaro 6y ago
    > My backyard camera captures several other people's front porches Many cameras also have features to block out private areas entirely (since that's required in many places).

throwawaysea 6y ago

Minorities aren’t “regularly” persecuted by police. You need to define what “regularly” means and show your evidence if you want to make such a hyperbolic claim. Criminals are regularly persecuted by police, however. It happens to be that some demographic groups have higher crime rates and therefore have more frequent police interactions. And if they choose to resist the police or refuse their lawful orders, bad things will happen. But keep in mind the police have hundreds of millions of interactions with people each year. The number that end tragically due to an unjust application of policing (like the Philando Castile case) are incredibly rare. And in case you aren’t aware, black Americans want more policing not less, so don’t speak for them as a white person: https://news.gallup.com/poll/316571/black-americans-police-retain-local-presence.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/316571/black-americans-police-r...