3 ms·

Fair warning that this is a deeply unpopular argument in municipal politics.

by tptacek 11mo ago

therobots927 11mo ago
That depends on the municipality and who decides to show up to meetings and make a big deal about it. If enough people get freaked out by these cameras it’s gonna cause real problems for elected officials who enable them.
- tptacek 11mo ago
  I don't agree. I watched a concerted effort, involving a good deal of public comment (which: not a very effective tool for change; you have better tools in your arsenal), and vanishingly little of it took the "there's always going to be risk, crime isn't everything" tack. "This stuff doesn't work and causes more problems than it solves" is the effective answer, not this George Floyd stuff.
- tlb 11mo ago
  The people who show up to town council meetings lean heavily to the side of security over liberty. The most obvious reason is that it's mostly retired homeowners with busybody personality types. Privacy and liberty advocates are unlikely to win in council meetings by sheer numbers. They get some leverage with campaign donations, especially recently that Bitcoin made a lot of such people rich.
  - mothballed 11mo ago
    I live in a very liberty minded county. The kind of place with no building codes and pretty much no police. All our cameras on county/municipal property were voted disabled. So the feds just put their flock cameras anywhere they had a little piece of federal property, and there is no way to vote those ones off. They have little patches that cover the highways and some main thoroughfares. It's everywhere.
  - therobots927 11mo ago
    This really depends on where you live. I have no doubt that on average you’re correct but a lot of those retired homeowners are pretty upset about how the feds are behaving recently and believe it or not when your material needs are met some people actually try to use their privilege to help those most likely to be victimized by the surveillance state
fooqux 11mo ago
I think that's kinda the point? If public servants funded by taxpayers don't like it, maybe they shouldn't be forcing it on the populace and breaking the forth amendment.
- tptacek 11mo ago
  It's unpopular with residents. Residents do not have the attitude towards crime reflected in the comment I replied to. It's a very online thing to say.
  - kortex 11mo ago
    Yeah perhaps it's a bit inflammatory and terminally online of me to say. But it's true. Zero crime means zero crime. Minority report levels of surveilance and policing. What stance would you recommend? You're one of the folks here i recognize immediatedy and have a wealth of wisdom.
    - tptacek 11mo ago
      I would recommend not campaigning for public policy interventions on a premise of "some crime is OK".
      - kortex 11mo ago
        You're 100% correct, and in fact I think you've touched upon partly explaining why fascism and authoritarianism is not just on the doorstep, it's got a foot in the door (without a warrant) and is asking^W trying to force its way in saying "it's just a quick search, you have nothing to hide cause you're not doing anything wrong, are you?" Realism isn't very palatable. Most folks want to stay in their little rat race lane and push their little skinner box lever and get their little variable interval algorithmic treato, and they are content with that. That's fine. It's just a shame they gotta tighten the noose around absolutely everyone else for a morsel of safety.
        11mo ago

Fair warning that this is a deeply unpopular argument in municipal politics.

by tptacek 11mo ago

Fair warning that this is a deeply unpopular argument in municipal politics.

That depends on the municipality and who decides to show up to meetings and make a big deal about it. If enough people get freaked out by these cameras it’s gonna cause real problems for elected officials who enable them.

tptacek 11mo ago
I don't agree. I watched a concerted effort, involving a good deal of public comment (which: not a very effective tool for change; you have better tools in your arsenal), and vanishingly little of it took the "there's always going to be risk, crime isn't everything" tack. "This stuff doesn't work and causes more problems than it solves" is the effective answer, not this George Floyd stuff.
tlb 11mo ago
The people who show up to town council meetings lean heavily to the side of security over liberty. The most obvious reason is that it's mostly retired homeowners with busybody personality types. Privacy and liberty advocates are unlikely to win in council meetings by sheer numbers. They get some leverage with campaign donations, especially recently that Bitcoin made a lot of such people rich.
- mothballed 11mo ago
  I live in a very liberty minded county. The kind of place with no building codes and pretty much no police. All our cameras on county/municipal property were voted disabled. So the feds just put their flock cameras anywhere they had a little piece of federal property, and there is no way to vote those ones off. They have little patches that cover the highways and some main thoroughfares. It's everywhere.
- therobots927 11mo ago
  This really depends on where you live. I have no doubt that on average you’re correct but a lot of those retired homeowners are pretty upset about how the feds are behaving recently and believe it or not when your material needs are met some people actually try to use their privilege to help those most likely to be victimized by the surveillance state

fooqux 11mo ago

I think that's kinda the point? If public servants funded by taxpayers don't like it, maybe they shouldn't be forcing it on the populace and breaking the forth amendment.

tptacek 11mo ago
It's unpopular with residents. Residents do not have the attitude towards crime reflected in the comment I replied to. It's a very online thing to say.
- kortex 11mo ago
  Yeah perhaps it's a bit inflammatory and terminally online of me to say. But it's true. Zero crime means zero crime. Minority report levels of surveilance and policing. What stance would you recommend? You're one of the folks here i recognize immediatedy and have a wealth of wisdom.
  - tptacek 11mo ago
    I would recommend not campaigning for public policy interventions on a premise of "some crime is OK".
    - kortex 11mo ago
      You're 100% correct, and in fact I think you've touched upon partly explaining why fascism and authoritarianism is not just on the doorstep, it's got a foot in the door (without a warrant) and is asking^W trying to force its way in saying "it's just a quick search, you have nothing to hide cause you're not doing anything wrong, are you?" Realism isn't very palatable. Most folks want to stay in their little rat race lane and push their little skinner box lever and get their little variable interval algorithmic treato, and they are content with that. That's fine. It's just a shame they gotta tighten the noose around absolutely everyone else for a morsel of safety.
      - 11mo ago