3 ms·

What stops the victims from secretly recording such incidents? Modern mic recorders are microscopic.

by akomtu 5y ago

alphabettsy 5y ago
It’s illegal in some places.
- caymanjim 5y ago
  Specifically, it's illegal in Florida, where the offenses allegedly occurred. Florida is what's called a "two-party consent" state, meaning that it's illegal to record any non-public conversation (phone call, in-person, Zoom, etc.) without explicit consent from all parties involved. Other states allow single-party consent in some or all circumstances.
  - JJMcJ 5y ago
    Also California is two-party.
- akomtu 5y ago
  Why on earth does it matter? That recording can be used in many ways, anonymously or not, in a court or in an informal investigation. You don't even have to use it, and if you don't use it, it simply doesn't exist.
  - caymanjim 5y ago
    Or as grounds for terminating your employment. Or as evidence in a criminal trial against you. Or in a civil lawsuit against you. Or to discredit you for breaking the law. The only beneficial way it could be used is in the court of public opinion.
    - akomtu 5y ago
      All of that may happen if you're careless. And, BTW, you're already being recorded all the time or occasionally by security cameras, your phone and various hardware.
  - scottlamb 5y ago
    > Why on earth does it matter? That recording can be used in many ways, anonymously or not, in a court or in an informal investigation. You don't even have to use it, and if you don't use it, it simply doesn't exist. That's not my understanding. Courts don't allow hearsay or evidence without someone certifying for its accuracy, and for good reason. Think of deepfakes for a recent example of why, although this rule far far predates them. And in this specific case where many of us live, California Penal Code 630 says: [1] > (d) Except as proof in an action or prosecution for violation of this section, evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon or recording a confidential communication in violation of this section is not admissible in any judicial, administrative, legislative, or other proceeding. So basically if you obtain a recording of someone doing something illegal without getting that person's consent, the recording can be used against you but explicitly can't be used against them. I view this as an unjust law that protects the powerful at the expense of the powerless. I have a friend whose manager basically said "you should change careers because you're a girl". She might have been able to do something about it if not for this law... [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=632 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....
onychomys 5y ago
How do you know when one of your coworkers is about to grab your chest? Would they just have to have the mic running every moment they're at work?
- rektide 5y ago
  I'm not presenting this as a realistic option (most of us aren't cool enough to walk around with freedesktop computers running), but there is the excellent JACK Timemachine[1], a long long long longstanding app which is just a big green button. Hit the button & it saves the last n (ex: 5) seconds of audio to file & continues recording until you hit the button again. This gives you the ability to keep a mic running while dumping most of the audio, & but still be able to save things that have just happened on need. It's an app I've wanted to make use of a bunch. A lot of company's I've worked at will try to quote noteable/funny/intersting things people say, & this would be a neat version. Same sort of idea would work in other places, like a gaming guild; we have one dude build a whole web soundboard with various things people had said anyone could pull up, well over a decade ago now; making that board would have been way easier with JACK-TM. Or, like, sometimes if there's a cute quote in a show or movie I'm watching, it'd be fun to be able to easily pull the sample. Or just, if I missed what someone said, this would be a possible tool to go re-review. Or, alas, if being harassed, being able to grab that recent clip. This is some old as dirt software; always seemed interesting. I am not a lawyer, I have no official legal advice to give. States like Florida with two-party consent laws make trying to record offenses against yourself, make recording legal & safety issues enormously complicated (See ACLU Florida's page on recording the police[2] for some specific treatment of the matter, showing it's complexity). But JACK-Timemachine feels like a sensible middle-ground. There's some buffering in ephemeral memory, but no recording, until one hits the button. That one can record after the fact, if one's suffering illegal/discriminatory/harassing treatment, feels like a necessary defense one certainly ought be allowed. Let me re-iterate that as far as I know there's no basis in law that actually makes it clear JACK-Timemachine is legal for use in two-party consent states (but it feels like it necessarily ought to be to me). [1] http://plugin.org.uk/timemachine/ http://plugin.org.uk/timemachine/ [2] https://www.aclufl.org/en/know-your-rights/right-record-police-florida https://www.aclufl.org/en/know-your-rights/right-record-poli...
- 5y ago

What stops the victims from secretly recording such incidents? Modern mic recorders are microscopic.

by akomtu 5y ago

What stops the victims from secretly recording such incidents? Modern mic recorders are microscopic.

alphabettsy 5y ago

It’s illegal in some places.

caymanjim 5y ago
Specifically, it's illegal in Florida, where the offenses allegedly occurred. Florida is what's called a "two-party consent" state, meaning that it's illegal to record any non-public conversation (phone call, in-person, Zoom, etc.) without explicit consent from all parties involved. Other states allow single-party consent in some or all circumstances.
- JJMcJ 5y ago
  Also California is two-party.
akomtu 5y ago
Why on earth does it matter? That recording can be used in many ways, anonymously or not, in a court or in an informal investigation. You don't even have to use it, and if you don't use it, it simply doesn't exist.
- caymanjim 5y ago
  Or as grounds for terminating your employment. Or as evidence in a criminal trial against you. Or in a civil lawsuit against you. Or to discredit you for breaking the law. The only beneficial way it could be used is in the court of public opinion.
  - akomtu 5y ago
    All of that may happen if you're careless. And, BTW, you're already being recorded all the time or occasionally by security cameras, your phone and various hardware.
- scottlamb 5y ago
  > Why on earth does it matter? That recording can be used in many ways, anonymously or not, in a court or in an informal investigation. You don't even have to use it, and if you don't use it, it simply doesn't exist. That's not my understanding. Courts don't allow hearsay or evidence without someone certifying for its accuracy, and for good reason. Think of deepfakes for a recent example of why, although this rule far far predates them. And in this specific case where many of us live, California Penal Code 630 says: [1] > (d) Except as proof in an action or prosecution for violation of this section, evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon or recording a confidential communication in violation of this section is not admissible in any judicial, administrative, legislative, or other proceeding. So basically if you obtain a recording of someone doing something illegal without getting that person's consent, the recording can be used against you but explicitly can't be used against them. I view this as an unjust law that protects the powerful at the expense of the powerless. I have a friend whose manager basically said "you should change careers because you're a girl". She might have been able to do something about it if not for this law... [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=632 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

onychomys 5y ago

How do you know when one of your coworkers is about to grab your chest? Would they just have to have the mic running every moment they're at work?

rektide 5y ago
I'm not presenting this as a realistic option (most of us aren't cool enough to walk around with freedesktop computers running), but there is the excellent JACK Timemachine[1], a long long long longstanding app which is just a big green button. Hit the button & it saves the last n (ex: 5) seconds of audio to file & continues recording until you hit the button again. This gives you the ability to keep a mic running while dumping most of the audio, & but still be able to save things that have just happened on need. It's an app I've wanted to make use of a bunch. A lot of company's I've worked at will try to quote noteable/funny/intersting things people say, & this would be a neat version. Same sort of idea would work in other places, like a gaming guild; we have one dude build a whole web soundboard with various things people had said anyone could pull up, well over a decade ago now; making that board would have been way easier with JACK-TM. Or, like, sometimes if there's a cute quote in a show or movie I'm watching, it'd be fun to be able to easily pull the sample. Or just, if I missed what someone said, this would be a possible tool to go re-review. Or, alas, if being harassed, being able to grab that recent clip. This is some old as dirt software; always seemed interesting. I am not a lawyer, I have no official legal advice to give. States like Florida with two-party consent laws make trying to record offenses against yourself, make recording legal & safety issues enormously complicated (See ACLU Florida's page on recording the police[2] for some specific treatment of the matter, showing it's complexity). But JACK-Timemachine feels like a sensible middle-ground. There's some buffering in ephemeral memory, but no recording, until one hits the button. That one can record after the fact, if one's suffering illegal/discriminatory/harassing treatment, feels like a necessary defense one certainly ought be allowed. Let me re-iterate that as far as I know there's no basis in law that actually makes it clear JACK-Timemachine is legal for use in two-party consent states (but it feels like it necessarily ought to be to me). [1] http://plugin.org.uk/timemachine/ http://plugin.org.uk/timemachine/ [2] https://www.aclufl.org/en/know-your-rights/right-record-police-florida https://www.aclufl.org/en/know-your-rights/right-record-poli...
5y ago