4 ms·
A point of context: Dataminr == Tweets, with ML and human filtering. They're one of the few remaining firehose consumers.
by falcolas 3y ago
A point of context: Dataminr == Tweets, with ML and human filtering. They're one of the few remaining firehose consumers.
- beebmam 3y agoIf this is true, how can someone claim that collecting public information, like tweets, is "spying"?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- detaro 3y agoIt's not exactly unusual that people consider too-detailed and/or large scale attention paid to technically public things "spying" or similar to it. E.g. if the government were to have agents follow members of a group anywhere and watching their homes, without breaking into private spaces, that'd probably be labeled as such too. Even though they are just collecting publicly visible information and report "Mr Smith is getting close to the court house. Mrs Smith spoke to the lawyer again." Social media just makes automating that a lot easier.
- Dracophoenix 3y ago> Even though they are just collecting publicly visible information and report "Mr Smith is getting close to the court house. Mrs Smith spoke to the lawyer again. If this observation was made done from a public area or from a publicly visible vantage point, how would you're describing be any different from news coverage?
- hwillis 3y agoBasically every way? If the government was tracking everywhere you went via cameras, people would also call that spying. Are you arguing that when a spy follows someone in public and watches everything they do, that isn't spying?
- Dracophoenix 3y agoWhile they don't track other people everywhere at once, the media does record what people say or do and you as an individual have little control concerning what's published about you and how and to what degree other will react. But this form of recording isn't generally called spying, even if the circumstances are disadvantageous or even dangerous to the subject being recorded. When it comes to the media, the general understanding is that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public area. I don't see why it would be different for government. In addition, the government needn't set up these cameras when it can simply request footage from third parties such as Nest and/or its end-users. The person "violating" your expectation to privacy in a public setting is your fellow private citizen whether for occupational or security-related reasons. The same is true for public posts on the Internet. There is nothing that forbids the government from copy and compiling information that's publicly available to all.
- hwillis 3y agoContext and scale matter. Drawing a picture of a dollar bill is not illegal, but forgery is. It's not illegal to call someone, or to ask them a question, or to follow someone. It IS illegal to stalk someone.
- Dracophoenix 3y ago> Context and scale matter. Who determines context in this case? On what basis? I disagree that scale matters. A right doesn't disappear simply because multiple people exercise it in a way others find unpleasant. Either a liberty exists on its own merits to it doesn't. > Drawing a picture of a dollar bill is not illegal, but forgery is Forgery requires a mens rea; in particular there must be an intent to deceive or profit from deceit. > It's not illegal to call someone, or to ask them a question, or to follow someone. It IS illegal to stalk someone. In a number of cases, stalking statues have and do implicate rights. There isn't a consistent corpus of case law or statute to make a clear distinction between merely undesirable contact and stalking as such. https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2023-04-19/supreme-court-urged-to-extend-free-speech-rights-to-online-stalkers https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2023-04-19/supreme-co...
- tremon 3y agoThe same way that following someone around every time they leave their house is "spying".
- zamnos 3y agoAre you suggesting that theintercept.com has a headline that uses a word inaccurately to generate outrage?