3 ms·

There's a difference between being in public and being tracked. Of course they don't have expectations of privacy in terms of people being able to e.g. take ph

There's a difference between being in public and being tracked. Of course they don't have expectations of privacy in terms of people being able to e.g. take photos or videos of them. The same way people can take photos of you or me. But broadcasting someone's real-time location to the whole world all day long, in real time, is something else entirely. That has never been considered part of being in public. That's targeted surveillance, which is very, very different.

greyface- 1y ago
It should be noted that SFMTA, the alleged victim of this website, uses a network of 400+ Flock ALPR cameras to track the movement of every vehicle in the region. They're able to do this not because of some special agency authority, but because it's legal for anyone to surveil public areas.
- what 1y ago
  How is that relevant? Do they publish the exact location of every vehicle in real time?
  - dymk 1y ago
    They keep that data for themselves, they don’t even tell you how much data they have on you. Why is it unfair that they also be tracked?
    - Eisenstein 1y ago
      It might be fair, but is it a good idea? What you are doing is justifying something you wouldn't agree with because it targets people belonging to an organization doing the thing you don't agree with. That is can be problematic because 1. They now can say 'well it is done to us why can't we do it to others' instead of engaging with real arguments about using ALPR flock cameras to track people 2. You assume that a person working for an organization is automatically complicit in the decisions of that organization and is therefore fair to be targeted by systems you don't want targeted at yourself -- this is fine when in war or other struggles deemed worthy of placing aside normal human morality temporarily, but is this one of those? 3. This type of thing can turn into a race to the bottom where each side escalates compromises of their basic value systems
      - dymk 1y ago
        The police as an organization do not care about engaging with you in good faith and are far past a race to the bottom regarding surveillance.
        Eisenstein 1y ago
        A race is composed of more than one party.
        pclmulqdq 1y ago
        Don't worry, urban police departments will find the bottom as fast as possible without anyone else's help. You're not "racing" by joining them.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
- hooverd 1y ago
  Well, maybe they shouldn't either?
hopelite 1y ago
How do you think these public officials with massive paychecks and life long massive pensions operate; they drive around in the most noticeable little vehicles that you can spot from a mile away. If you needed to track them for some reason you would just follow them, and most likely people in the neighborhood probably already know their routes anyways. It seems you are fixated on something you just can’t let go, as if these are some kind of undercover agents selling kidnapped and trafficked young children and he’s blowing their cover … they’re writing traffic tickets off $480 dollars … the least we spoiled be able to do is track the public official while they’re writing excessive fines.
- jjcob 1y ago
  If you park your car on a bus stop, you deserve that fine. I wish my city fine like this.
  - lokar 1y ago
    And if you park blocking bike lane?
    - tstenner 1y ago
      Straight to jail.
  - more_corn 1y ago
    Parking in an implicit crosswalk. (Go look it up, I had to). Parking for 3:14 in a 3:00 while picnicking in the park. Parking in church service overflow. All things I’ve been ticketed for or towed for in SF. Those mfuckers just out to make money. They literally write more tickets when sfmta has a budget shortfall. It’s not about public order it’s about revenue.
- Epa095 1y ago
  Massive paycheck? Feel free to apply yourself https://careers.sf.gov/classifications/?classCode=8214 https://careers.sf.gov/classifications/?classCode=8214 I dont know how far 70-100k goes in SF, but accoriding to https://www.livingwage-sf.org/living-wage-calculator/ https://www.livingwage-sf.org/living-wage-calculator/ it is barely enough for a single adult, but you better not have a child!
Aachen 1y ago
> Of course they don't have expectations of privacy in terms of people being able to e.g. take photos or videos of them. The same way people can take photos of you or me. Might be a culture difference with europe but I find it rude if someone would take a picture of me without asking. I can think of few purposes (stalking, facial recognition training or tracking, sharing in a chat group to make fun of) that you can do with a picture of a random person on the street that you'd not get permission for when you're required to ask It's always a balance: if someone wants to do it for legal reasons (I just stole their purse and am running away) that's very different. There's almost no law that works absolutely anyway, there can very often be overriding reasons that are already defined in the law (or another law) or that a judge will accept. Just talking about the default case
- crazygringo 1y ago
  Of course it's rude. But we don't criminalize behavior that is merely rude. It's rude to swear at someone or fart in their direction too. In public, US courts have established you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Because you're in public. Someone can take photos or videos of you, whether you're in the background or whether they're zooming in on your face. Obviously if you're getting right up in their face and refusing to go away, that turns into harassment and you can call the cops. But it doesn't matter if you're using a camera or not.
- JdeBP 1y ago
  It's not only a culture difference but a legal one. It's not just rude, it's actually illegal in some parts of Europe. Some parts of Europe remember what it was like when people went around photographing other people and making reports on them. Furthermore, in the Netherlands, for example, there's a portrait right that photograph subjects have.
  - Aachen 1y ago
    Well yeah, there is that, too. I don't really care about the law so much as ethics though because law follows societal norms and this law isn't commonly enforced anyway

greyface- 1y ago

It should be noted that SFMTA, the alleged victim of this website, uses a network of 400+ Flock ALPR cameras to track the movement of every vehicle in the region. They're able to do this not because of some special agency authority, but because it's legal for anyone to surveil public areas.

what 1y ago
How is that relevant? Do they publish the exact location of every vehicle in real time?
- dymk 1y ago
  They keep that data for themselves, they don’t even tell you how much data they have on you. Why is it unfair that they also be tracked?
  - Eisenstein 1y ago
    It might be fair, but is it a good idea? What you are doing is justifying something you wouldn't agree with because it targets people belonging to an organization doing the thing you don't agree with. That is can be problematic because 1. They now can say 'well it is done to us why can't we do it to others' instead of engaging with real arguments about using ALPR flock cameras to track people 2. You assume that a person working for an organization is automatically complicit in the decisions of that organization and is therefore fair to be targeted by systems you don't want targeted at yourself -- this is fine when in war or other struggles deemed worthy of placing aside normal human morality temporarily, but is this one of those? 3. This type of thing can turn into a race to the bottom where each side escalates compromises of their basic value systems
    - dymk 1y ago
      The police as an organization do not care about engaging with you in good faith and are far past a race to the bottom regarding surveillance.
      - Eisenstein 1y ago
        A race is composed of more than one party.
        pclmulqdq 1y ago
        Don't worry, urban police departments will find the bottom as fast as possible without anyone else's help. You're not "racing" by joining them.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
hooverd 1y ago
Well, maybe they shouldn't either?

hopelite 1y ago

How do you think these public officials with massive paychecks and life long massive pensions operate; they drive around in the most noticeable little vehicles that you can spot from a mile away. If you needed to track them for some reason you would just follow them, and most likely people in the neighborhood probably already know their routes anyways. It seems you are fixated on something you just can’t let go, as if these are some kind of undercover agents selling kidnapped and trafficked young children and he’s blowing their cover … they’re writing traffic tickets off $480 dollars … the least we spoiled be able to do is track the public official while they’re writing excessive fines.

jjcob 1y ago
If you park your car on a bus stop, you deserve that fine. I wish my city fine like this.
- lokar 1y ago
  And if you park blocking bike lane?
  - tstenner 1y ago
    Straight to jail.
- more_corn 1y ago
  Parking in an implicit crosswalk. (Go look it up, I had to). Parking for 3:14 in a 3:00 while picnicking in the park. Parking in church service overflow. All things I’ve been ticketed for or towed for in SF. Those mfuckers just out to make money. They literally write more tickets when sfmta has a budget shortfall. It’s not about public order it’s about revenue.
Epa095 1y ago
Massive paycheck? Feel free to apply yourself https://careers.sf.gov/classifications/?classCode=8214 https://careers.sf.gov/classifications/?classCode=8214 I dont know how far 70-100k goes in SF, but accoriding to https://www.livingwage-sf.org/living-wage-calculator/ https://www.livingwage-sf.org/living-wage-calculator/ it is barely enough for a single adult, but you better not have a child!

Aachen 1y ago

> Of course they don't have expectations of privacy in terms of people being able to e.g. take photos or videos of them. The same way people can take photos of you or me. Might be a culture difference with europe but I find it rude if someone would take a picture of me without asking. I can think of few purposes (stalking, facial recognition training or tracking, sharing in a chat group to make fun of) that you can do with a picture of a random person on the street that you'd not get permission for when you're required to ask It's always a balance: if someone wants to do it for legal reasons (I just stole their purse and am running away) that's very different. There's almost no law that works absolutely anyway, there can very often be overriding reasons that are already defined in the law (or another law) or that a judge will accept. Just talking about the default case

crazygringo 1y ago
Of course it's rude. But we don't criminalize behavior that is merely rude. It's rude to swear at someone or fart in their direction too. In public, US courts have established you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Because you're in public. Someone can take photos or videos of you, whether you're in the background or whether they're zooming in on your face. Obviously if you're getting right up in their face and refusing to go away, that turns into harassment and you can call the cops. But it doesn't matter if you're using a camera or not.
JdeBP 1y ago
It's not only a culture difference but a legal one. It's not just rude, it's actually illegal in some parts of Europe. Some parts of Europe remember what it was like when people went around photographing other people and making reports on them. Furthermore, in the Netherlands, for example, there's a portrait right that photograph subjects have.
- Aachen 1y ago
  Well yeah, there is that, too. I don't really care about the law so much as ethics though because law follows societal norms and this law isn't commonly enforced anyway