3 ms·

All surveillance should start with ministers first. Their private lives streamed 24/7 over internet for the public to watch. Of course, this is only for nation

All surveillance should start with ministers first. Their private lives streamed 24/7 over internet for the public to watch. Of course, this is only for national security since humans are corruptible, and these people have vastly most control over a nation's resources, thus, 24/7 monitoring of their private lives, by the public, is super important... for national security ... or else how we can be sure they have not been compromised by a foreign power.. or are not being blackmailed to act against the nation? All for national security... nothing else.

inigyou 1mo ago
If Flock is legal in the USA, then it's also legal for a private individual to make their own Flock network.
- jazzyjackson 1mo ago
  When police do it they get to call it “investigation” but when I do it all of a sudden it’s “stalking”
- anonymousiam 1mo ago
  In the US, it's "legal" for "law enforcement" to use Stingray equipment, which transmits on licensed cellular spectrum and interferes with customers who use the spectrum, sometimes even preventing calls for emergency services. This should be a plain and simple violation of FCC regulations, but who's going to enforce that law against law enforcement? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_use_in_United_States_law_enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_use_in_United_States_...
- m463 1mo ago
  Why not a roving dashcam-based flock copycat? (I thought I heard fedex vehicles actually do this)
sakisv 1mo ago
While this may be a bit of a tongue-in-cheek comment, I've started to think that this is exactly how it should be: People that are elected by the public and hold the power to define every aspect of our lives, should be held to the absolute highest level of scrutiny possible. Every aspect and every single moment of their lives should be transparent and recorded while they hold office, no exceptions whatsoever. I will concede that having it broadcasted may be a tad hard to do, but there should be a record of what happened during their time - in fact there should be a way to answer the question "what was minister X doing at 2026-08-29 20:13:14 UTC?" And for the argument that says "oh then nobody would want to do it", I think that's in favour of this approach. Look around at what we're dealing with, and which people want to win elections and the fervour with which they go about it. We should be trying to make this kind of "job" as unappealing as possible. It should be a chore, not something to go after.

inigyou 1mo ago

If Flock is legal in the USA, then it's also legal for a private individual to make their own Flock network.

jazzyjackson 1mo ago
When police do it they get to call it “investigation” but when I do it all of a sudden it’s “stalking”
anonymousiam 1mo ago
In the US, it's "legal" for "law enforcement" to use Stingray equipment, which transmits on licensed cellular spectrum and interferes with customers who use the spectrum, sometimes even preventing calls for emergency services. This should be a plain and simple violation of FCC regulations, but who's going to enforce that law against law enforcement? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_use_in_United_States_law_enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stingray_use_in_United_States_...
m463 1mo ago
Why not a roving dashcam-based flock copycat? (I thought I heard fedex vehicles actually do this)

sakisv 1mo ago

While this may be a bit of a tongue-in-cheek comment, I've started to think that this is exactly how it should be: People that are elected by the public and hold the power to define every aspect of our lives, should be held to the absolute highest level of scrutiny possible. Every aspect and every single moment of their lives should be transparent and recorded while they hold office, no exceptions whatsoever. I will concede that having it broadcasted may be a tad hard to do, but there should be a record of what happened during their time - in fact there should be a way to answer the question "what was minister X doing at 2026-08-29 20:13:14 UTC?" And for the argument that says "oh then nobody would want to do it", I think that's in favour of this approach. Look around at what we're dealing with, and which people want to win elections and the fervour with which they go about it. We should be trying to make this kind of "job" as unappealing as possible. It should be a chore, not something to go after.