9 ms·
It's already been decided by SCOTUS that things like heat imaging require a warrant, and that arbitrary scanning without a warrant (or presumably also probable
by Jtsummers 3mo ago
It's already been decided by SCOTUS that things like heat imaging require a warrant, and that arbitrary scanning without a warrant (or presumably also probable cause) is a violation of the 4th amendment. This technology (still science fiction) would likely get similar treatment using the existing precedent about how new technologies can be used.
- kunai 3mo agoThe easy workaround for this (which Flock has used to massive success and why it's drawn so much ire) is to set up or subcontract a private corporation to do this which will inherently be subject to much less stringent oversight. It also allows government and law enforcement to evade accountability.
- Jtsummers 3mo agoThe legal arguments against Flock are different than the legal arguments against thermal imaging by the police (without a warrant or probably cause). And the latter is closer to the hypothetical broad mind reading (science fiction, again) than it is to Flock. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States - The case I was referencing.