The government should immediately ban the sale and promotion of glasses that contain recording capability. The government should explore using existing laws, such as RIPA, GDPR, DPA to take immediate action, whilst beginning the process of new legislation.
“there’s no expectation of privacy in public places”
In the US, the judicial system is shifting about that. Slowly! But it is. There is a name for this legal theory which I forgot now. The idea is, once you string together enough individual data points, they enjoy 4A protection. Even if any one by itself wouldn’t rise to 4A level. That means while you don’t have an expectation of privacy, you DO have an expectation the gov won’t use all that data to surveil you without a warrant.
Ofc, that only binds the government. It does NOT bind private co’s! Google. Meta. A million data brokers. Flock! So it only addresses part of the prob. Is it good? Yes! But we also need protection against private collectors. In meatspace, we cannot block Flocks and randos with smart glasses. Or the total data fusion that results.
This is a logical fallacy. I’m not picking on you specifically, because that way of thinking is all over social media. But it is not a useful or productive way to think about the world.
Sure. I totally get your sense of frustration, and you’re not wrong about that per se.
But in general the law still is enforced. All these things can be true at the same time, (1) We are back-sliding in our enforcement, especially for the politically powerful, (2) There are systemic attacks on the rule of law, (3) In general, the law is still enforced, and (4) There is movement in the court system towards better privacy protections. Even at the very top, arguably corrupt levels of the courts, we see things like Carpenter v. US. And others like that. Those trickle down into a million cases at lower levels of the judicial system. It takes a long time, and the system is not a monolith. It moves slowly. But it moves.
There are like a million court cases every day where there is no political angle, and the right thing happens. The courts slap down 4A violations all the itme, like lack of warrant. And we’re seeing a big upswing in cases with a political angle, where the courts stand up against malicious prosecutions too.
So you are right, problems exist! Absolutely. But be careful, b/c frequency of reporting is not frequency of occurence! The right thing happening is not news. It happens all the time, with no outrage-pumping headlines.
My main point is, it isn’t a black and white situation. We can’t simply say, “The law isn’t being enforced, so it is meaningless”. That’s too black and white. It is being enforced, imperfectly. And it is NOT meaningless to have legal protections for privacy invasions.
We have probs, yes. A shitton of 'em. But we also have to be careful of not falling into doomerism. That leads to bad outcomes.
I was simply stating the US government 3 letter agencies have been disregarding the law when it comes to our privacy for many years. I didn’t communicate the statement very well. Sorry.
I don’t have faith in the liberal system. It’s been failing us regular people since it’s inception. If there were more people like you, it might stand a chance at being slightly less exploitative… You’re not the average person running things, though.
And anyways, you can’t reform a system that has exploitation at it’s core.
A revolution will take place one day. It might not be in our lifetime, or maybe it’ll be next year, who knows.
In the US, the judicial system is shifting about that. Slowly! But it is. There is a name for this legal theory which I forgot now. The idea is, once you string together enough individual data points, they enjoy 4A protection. Even if any one by itself wouldn’t rise to 4A level. That means while you don’t have an expectation of privacy, you DO have an expectation the gov won’t use all that data to surveil you without a warrant.
Ofc, that only binds the government. It does NOT bind private co’s! Google. Meta. A million data brokers. Flock! So it only addresses part of the prob. Is it good? Yes! But we also need protection against private collectors. In meatspace, we cannot block Flocks and randos with smart glasses. Or the total data fusion that results.
Ah, good. The government will finally start obeying the law. I’m sure Edward can come home now.
This is a logical fallacy. I’m not picking on you specifically, because that way of thinking is all over social media. But it is not a useful or productive way to think about the world.
The law is meaningless if it’s not enforced.
Sure. I totally get your sense of frustration, and you’re not wrong about that per se.
But in general the law still is enforced. All these things can be true at the same time, (1) We are back-sliding in our enforcement, especially for the politically powerful, (2) There are systemic attacks on the rule of law, (3) In general, the law is still enforced, and (4) There is movement in the court system towards better privacy protections. Even at the very top, arguably corrupt levels of the courts, we see things like Carpenter v. US. And others like that. Those trickle down into a million cases at lower levels of the judicial system. It takes a long time, and the system is not a monolith. It moves slowly. But it moves.
There are like a million court cases every day where there is no political angle, and the right thing happens. The courts slap down 4A violations all the itme, like lack of warrant. And we’re seeing a big upswing in cases with a political angle, where the courts stand up against malicious prosecutions too.
So you are right, problems exist! Absolutely. But be careful, b/c frequency of reporting is not frequency of occurence! The right thing happening is not news. It happens all the time, with no outrage-pumping headlines.
My main point is, it isn’t a black and white situation. We can’t simply say, “The law isn’t being enforced, so it is meaningless”. That’s too black and white. It is being enforced, imperfectly. And it is NOT meaningless to have legal protections for privacy invasions.
We have probs, yes. A shitton of 'em. But we also have to be careful of not falling into doomerism. That leads to bad outcomes.
You seem kind. Thank you for that.
I was simply stating the US government 3 letter agencies have been disregarding the law when it comes to our privacy for many years. I didn’t communicate the statement very well. Sorry.
I don’t have faith in the liberal system. It’s been failing us regular people since it’s inception. If there were more people like you, it might stand a chance at being slightly less exploitative… You’re not the average person running things, though.
And anyways, you can’t reform a system that has exploitation at it’s core.
A revolution will take place one day. It might not be in our lifetime, or maybe it’ll be next year, who knows.
Take care kind stranger.
Yah, I agree, the three letter agencies have run roughshod.
Cheers. Hopefully we both live to see things get better, somehow.