5 ms·

Your source doesn't seem to support your claim, though? Being more careful on school-monitored devices seems like an ideal outcome: you want students using scho

Your source doesn't seem to support your claim, though? Being more careful on school-monitored devices seems like an ideal outcome: you want students using school-provided devices to do school-related things, not browse YouTube videos or look at porn. This would also apply in the future on work-provided devices, so it seems like they're learning an important skill in the process? The rest of your examples have no relevance to the original claim, and are (again), largely hypothetical. They're "real examples", but the connection between them and the original claim is still hypothetical. This is why I called your earlier responses attempts to move the goalposts: you have yet to provide any evidence that directly supports your original claim, while instead providing "evidence" of similar things that aren't directly related except through careful framing. Do you have any examples directly relevant to the original statement? Here it is again, in case you've lost track: > They scan license plates all through the city and use this technology to create a chilling effect which allows their authoritarian regime to remain unchallenged.

soulofmischief 2y ago
> in case you've lost track Please argue in good faith and don't revert to sarcasm. I asked in my last comment for you to specify which part of the prior comment you had issue with, it would have been good to mention the specific part you were challenging at that time and not only just now, as my comment indeed touched on multiple related issues. So if you want specific information regarding NYC and the license plate issues, I can give you some links from reputable sources. I also recommend following up these sources with more research to corroborate claims or answer any further questions you may have, or if these sources simply do not satisfy your curiosity and rightful demands for hard proof. https://www.nyclu.org/report/automatic-license-plate-readers https://www.nyclu.org/report/automatic-license-plate-readers https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/documents-uncover-nypds-vast-license-plate-reader-database https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/documents-uncov... https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/automatic-license-plate-readers-legal-status-and-policy-recommendations https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/auto... The above research report mentions a US Supreme Court ruling specifically mentioning a chilling effect with respect to surveillance, United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/10-1259/case.pdf https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/10-1259/case... "Awareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms. And the Government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse" - Justice Sonia Sotomayor And in another comment in this thread I mentioned the stop-and-frisk program in NYC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_Cit... I could point to this and multitudes of other incidents where the NYC government has grossly overstepped their bounds. I can also point to a high-profile case in my old city of Fort Worth where city officials and police were using government databases to stalk and harass individuals, even ex-girlfriends, and the police chief and head IT guy also got harassed and litigated for attempting to expose it: https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/former-fort-worth-police-chief-says-he-was-fired-for-investigating-city-hall-corruption/2129419/ https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/former-fort-worth-police-c... https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article291029015.html https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article2... Here's what the cops in my current city do: https://www.wbrz.com/news/brpd-narcotics-officer-exposes-wrongdoing-coverups-and-quotas-in-bombshell-interview-with-nakamoto/ https://www.wbrz.com/news/brpd-narcotics-officer-exposes-wro... > "At least three to four nights a week they would have us riding through the neighborhoods," Ardoin said. "If you saw a random black person walking around the street and hasn't done anything, they would tell us just to jump out the vehicle, grab them and pat them down without probable cause. I voiced my opinions several times, and I didn't agree with that." It's why we called the police the "jump out boys" growing up. I personally was subject to years of targeted police and government harassment in my small town, which severely impacted my life. I shudder to think about what those creeps would do with a full ALPR kit across the parish. My state's police force has repeatedly shown that they cannot be trusted to follow the law, and they constantly get caught harassing, stalking, spying, selling drugs, guns and more. You wouldn't understand unless you grew up in a real police state like Louisiana, with an incarceration rate of over 1%, higher than any independent country in the world. You may have had the privilege of not being a targeted demographic in such a state and thus having the law usually work on your side, and so the potentials for abuse, and the inevitability of such, may not seem immediately obvious to you. You seem interested in learning more and I can only provide so much, so I would definitely recommend following up with more research. If it's the "authoritarian regime" part you want proof of, and my given examples of general corruption of US police forces is not sufficient for you, you can google some NYC-specific cases, but I assume you're more interested in the effects of mass surveillance and ALPRs.
- try_the_bass 2y ago
  Again with the Gish Gallop. Given your remark about good faith efforts, I'm forced to conclude that was actually projection, and you're not interested in having a good faith discussion. I read your first three sources (skimmed the last of those, really), and in all three, the "chilling effect" you claim still remains a hypothetical. There's lots of "could" and "can" in those pieces, but no "did". I still see plenty of large-scale demonstrations in New York City, and in fact I hear of more of them, not fewer, at time goes on. Some of that is availability of said information/coverage/my information bubble, but it's certainly not evidence of a "chilling effect", despite the vast increase in city-wide surveillance that New York City has seen over the same time period. The evidence you present here is worth less than my own lived experience in this case, simply because it tells what could happen without contextualizing that within what has actually happened. Take the second example from your second source, about the DEA planning to use ALPRs at gun shows[1]. If you ignore the sensationalism, the story is actually boring: the DEA and ATF considered whether or not they could use readers at gun shows to help track illegal gun sales. They didn't end up doing it, likely because it would have been illegal to do so. This is the system working. This is not evidence of a them using this technology to enact an authoritarian surveillance state. This is a state that has broad access to this kind of technology, and then often doesn't use it because it's legally obligated that they not, unless they can provide the proper justification. It's also an example that is (again!!) unrelated to the claim you are making. The rest is just more of the same Gish Gallop, and I'm tired of engaging with you on this. Even if your intent about having a good faith discussion is sincere, in practice you are still not engaging in a good-faith way. What I asked for was simple: evidence of a concrete statement you presented as fact. What you've given me is a laundry list of closely related things, but nothing that actually matches the context of the statement you made. This is not a good-faith discussion in practice, because you refuse to keep the discussion narrowly focused and instead just gesture wildly at a bunch of things that are related (but many of whom are still arguing hypotheticals!), and that you feel should stand in for the evidence in asking for. But it doesn't, and given your repeated deflections, I'm forced to conclude that you don't have said concrete evidence. [1] https://www.aclu.org/news/free-future/dea-planned-monitor-gun-show-attendees-license-plate-readers-new-emails-reveal https://www.aclu.org/news/free-future/dea-planned-monitor-gu...

soulofmischief 2y ago

> in case you've lost track Please argue in good faith and don't revert to sarcasm. I asked in my last comment for you to specify which part of the prior comment you had issue with, it would have been good to mention the specific part you were challenging at that time and not only just now, as my comment indeed touched on multiple related issues. So if you want specific information regarding NYC and the license plate issues, I can give you some links from reputable sources. I also recommend following up these sources with more research to corroborate claims or answer any further questions you may have, or if these sources simply do not satisfy your curiosity and rightful demands for hard proof. https://www.nyclu.org/report/automatic-license-plate-readers https://www.nyclu.org/report/automatic-license-plate-readers https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/documents-uncover-nypds-vast-license-plate-reader-database https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/documents-uncov... https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/automatic-license-plate-readers-legal-status-and-policy-recommendations https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/auto... The above research report mentions a US Supreme Court ruling specifically mentioning a chilling effect with respect to surveillance, United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/10-1259/case.pdf https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/10-1259/case... "Awareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms. And the Government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse" - Justice Sonia Sotomayor And in another comment in this thread I mentioned the stop-and-frisk program in NYC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_Cit... I could point to this and multitudes of other incidents where the NYC government has grossly overstepped their bounds. I can also point to a high-profile case in my old city of Fort Worth where city officials and police were using government databases to stalk and harass individuals, even ex-girlfriends, and the police chief and head IT guy also got harassed and litigated for attempting to expose it: https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/former-fort-worth-police-chief-says-he-was-fired-for-investigating-city-hall-corruption/2129419/ https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/former-fort-worth-police-c... https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article291029015.html https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article2... Here's what the cops in my current city do: https://www.wbrz.com/news/brpd-narcotics-officer-exposes-wrongdoing-coverups-and-quotas-in-bombshell-interview-with-nakamoto/ https://www.wbrz.com/news/brpd-narcotics-officer-exposes-wro... > "At least three to four nights a week they would have us riding through the neighborhoods," Ardoin said. "If you saw a random black person walking around the street and hasn't done anything, they would tell us just to jump out the vehicle, grab them and pat them down without probable cause. I voiced my opinions several times, and I didn't agree with that." It's why we called the police the "jump out boys" growing up. I personally was subject to years of targeted police and government harassment in my small town, which severely impacted my life. I shudder to think about what those creeps would do with a full ALPR kit across the parish. My state's police force has repeatedly shown that they cannot be trusted to follow the law, and they constantly get caught harassing, stalking, spying, selling drugs, guns and more. You wouldn't understand unless you grew up in a real police state like Louisiana, with an incarceration rate of over 1%, higher than any independent country in the world. You may have had the privilege of not being a targeted demographic in such a state and thus having the law usually work on your side, and so the potentials for abuse, and the inevitability of such, may not seem immediately obvious to you. You seem interested in learning more and I can only provide so much, so I would definitely recommend following up with more research. If it's the "authoritarian regime" part you want proof of, and my given examples of general corruption of US police forces is not sufficient for you, you can google some NYC-specific cases, but I assume you're more interested in the effects of mass surveillance and ALPRs.

try_the_bass 2y ago
Again with the Gish Gallop. Given your remark about good faith efforts, I'm forced to conclude that was actually projection, and you're not interested in having a good faith discussion. I read your first three sources (skimmed the last of those, really), and in all three, the "chilling effect" you claim still remains a hypothetical. There's lots of "could" and "can" in those pieces, but no "did". I still see plenty of large-scale demonstrations in New York City, and in fact I hear of more of them, not fewer, at time goes on. Some of that is availability of said information/coverage/my information bubble, but it's certainly not evidence of a "chilling effect", despite the vast increase in city-wide surveillance that New York City has seen over the same time period. The evidence you present here is worth less than my own lived experience in this case, simply because it tells what could happen without contextualizing that within what has actually happened. Take the second example from your second source, about the DEA planning to use ALPRs at gun shows[1]. If you ignore the sensationalism, the story is actually boring: the DEA and ATF considered whether or not they could use readers at gun shows to help track illegal gun sales. They didn't end up doing it, likely because it would have been illegal to do so. This is the system working. This is not evidence of a them using this technology to enact an authoritarian surveillance state. This is a state that has broad access to this kind of technology, and then often doesn't use it because it's legally obligated that they not, unless they can provide the proper justification. It's also an example that is (again!!) unrelated to the claim you are making. The rest is just more of the same Gish Gallop, and I'm tired of engaging with you on this. Even if your intent about having a good faith discussion is sincere, in practice you are still not engaging in a good-faith way. What I asked for was simple: evidence of a concrete statement you presented as fact. What you've given me is a laundry list of closely related things, but nothing that actually matches the context of the statement you made. This is not a good-faith discussion in practice, because you refuse to keep the discussion narrowly focused and instead just gesture wildly at a bunch of things that are related (but many of whom are still arguing hypotheticals!), and that you feel should stand in for the evidence in asking for. But it doesn't, and given your repeated deflections, I'm forced to conclude that you don't have said concrete evidence. [1] https://www.aclu.org/news/free-future/dea-planned-monitor-gun-show-attendees-license-plate-readers-new-emails-reveal https://www.aclu.org/news/free-future/dea-planned-monitor-gu...