4 ms·
Law simply needs to internalize encryption. Your cameras are your property and only with consent of owner are they available to authorities. Public cameras sho
by AtlasBarfed 2y ago
Law simply needs to internalize encryption. Your cameras are your property and only with consent of owner are they available to authorities.
Public cameras should only be decrypted for evidence to support litigation of crimes, not for police to search for violay, because the current gigantic book of laws has an implicit assumption of a difficulty to enforce.
If suddenly police could use AI to fully prosecute all violations of law then we have all the laws necessary for worse than totalitarian existence.
Every mile you drove in a car will be 10 violations of law. Laugh loud? Violation disturbance of peace. Stand looking at your email too long? Loitering. Cross a park? Dozens of environmental violations.
- lupire 2y agoThis is already in the US Constitution. 4th Amendment.
- EasyMark 2y agoSure by some interpretations. Unfortunately the current SCOTUS doesn’t see it that way, they think webcams and electronic surveillance should be in the constitution or authorities can do anything. If there isn’t a law or constitutional text to the effect then it doesn’t exist to them. So we have to approach this from actually getting a law passed.
- hiatus 2y agoTFA is about camera footage obtained via warrant (thus following due process). Do you think evidence should not be obtainable via warrant? > Unfortunately the current SCOTUS doesn’t see it that way, they think webcams and electronic surveillance should be in the constitution or authorities can do anything. Citation needed.