26 ms·

Local procurement ordinances. A city council can pass an ordinance that does not allow any part of the city's budget to be spent on data from data brokers or re

Local procurement ordinances. A city council can pass an ordinance that does not allow any part of the city's budget to be spent on data from data brokers or really any technology -- drones, facial recognition, whatever. This academic paper looks at efforts in Oakland, Seattle, and San Diego [1] [1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2737006 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2737006

darawk 4y ago
Sure, but it seems pretty silly to ban the police from using data that any private citizen can access.
- humanistbot 4y ago
  Why? Private citizens don't have the ability to put you in an interrogation room against your will, and aren't in the business of being professional investigators. I get the argument that the best long-term solution would be regulating the data brokers. But if you want to do something right now that will actually restrict the police in your neighborhoods from using this as part of their jobs, this is a way to do that.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    Police don't need warrants when given consent. Police can search your house without a warrant if you tell them that they can. Police can buy information from data brokers. Warrants compel compliance
    - HarryHirsch 4y ago
      Maybe they should need warrants even with consent. The drug dog spiel has gotten far too old to be tolerable.
    - Cupertino95014 4y ago
      If you swim in the "don't talk to police" ocean, you discover versions of the comic dialog (well, it isn't really funny) when the cops have you in the interrogation room "with your consent": You: Am I under arrest? Cops: We just want to ask you a few questions so you can help us out. You are not a suspect. You: So I'm free to go? Cops: We just want to clear up a few things. You are not under arrest. You: So I'm free to go? Cops: Before you go, we want to ask a couple things. You: So I'm free to go? etc.
- nmeagent 4y ago
  According to the article, Fog Reveal accounts are typically only offered to law enforcement organizations. The company apparently realizes the sensitivity of these data and doesn't just make it available to any random paying customer.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    They are still voluntarily selling to police which is consenting. It's not your data, it's their data they collected about you. Perhaps a good line to draw would be to ban resale of data? It's difficult to try to write a law around but at least we all agree it's a problem. It's a start.
newaccount2021 4y ago
anigbrowl 4y ago
There are 3000 counties in America, how long do you think it takes to get things from city or county level up to state and federal level? These little local gestures aren't that effective overall. The problem is the commodification of your personal data.
- shakes_mcjunkie 4y ago
  > The problem is the commodification of your personal data. Can't it be both things at once? To say it's not at all the cops fault is ridiculous.
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    I'm not saying that, but that trying to do bottom-up legislation at the muni/county level is probably a losing strategy.
- landemva 4y ago
  > how long do you think it takes to get things from city or county level up to state and federal level? As an observer, it took about 20 years to get MJ prohibition removed from town law and later adopted by State. Different issues have different incentives.

darawk 4y ago

Sure, but it seems pretty silly to ban the police from using data that any private citizen can access.

humanistbot 4y ago
Why? Private citizens don't have the ability to put you in an interrogation room against your will, and aren't in the business of being professional investigators. I get the argument that the best long-term solution would be regulating the data brokers. But if you want to do something right now that will actually restrict the police in your neighborhoods from using this as part of their jobs, this is a way to do that.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  Police don't need warrants when given consent. Police can search your house without a warrant if you tell them that they can. Police can buy information from data brokers. Warrants compel compliance
  - HarryHirsch 4y ago
    Maybe they should need warrants even with consent. The drug dog spiel has gotten far too old to be tolerable.
  - Cupertino95014 4y ago
    If you swim in the "don't talk to police" ocean, you discover versions of the comic dialog (well, it isn't really funny) when the cops have you in the interrogation room "with your consent": You: Am I under arrest? Cops: We just want to ask you a few questions so you can help us out. You are not a suspect. You: So I'm free to go? Cops: We just want to clear up a few things. You are not under arrest. You: So I'm free to go? Cops: Before you go, we want to ask a couple things. You: So I'm free to go? etc.
nmeagent 4y ago
According to the article, Fog Reveal accounts are typically only offered to law enforcement organizations. The company apparently realizes the sensitivity of these data and doesn't just make it available to any random paying customer.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  They are still voluntarily selling to police which is consenting. It's not your data, it's their data they collected about you. Perhaps a good line to draw would be to ban resale of data? It's difficult to try to write a law around but at least we all agree it's a problem. It's a start.

newaccount2021 4y ago

anigbrowl 4y ago

There are 3000 counties in America, how long do you think it takes to get things from city or county level up to state and federal level? These little local gestures aren't that effective overall. The problem is the commodification of your personal data.

shakes_mcjunkie 4y ago
> The problem is the commodification of your personal data. Can't it be both things at once? To say it's not at all the cops fault is ridiculous.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  I'm not saying that, but that trying to do bottom-up legislation at the muni/county level is probably a losing strategy.
landemva 4y ago
> how long do you think it takes to get things from city or county level up to state and federal level? As an observer, it took about 20 years to get MJ prohibition removed from town law and later adopted by State. Different issues have different incentives.