A slowly boiled frog...

@sh76 said
===parking tickets===

That's lawfully accessible to the government

===credit card usage===

That's private info between me and my bank. Government cannot get that info unless voluntarily given.

=== internet search history ===

Should need a warrant to make the ISP give up that info

=== and online forum posts. ====

That's public domain. Zero problem with govern ...[text shortened]... vesting that data. If you post something on a public forum, you take the risk that someone reads it.

Your points seem naive to the potential harm here. Have you read anything about what Palantir has been up to? They're definitely collecting your banking information as we type. They've been awarded massive government contracts in order to "de-silo" all known information about you. This effort will link your Google searches to your tweets to your travel habits to your banking information. Yes, some is voluntarily provided to the public domain and some is not, but all is being amalgamated together and then sold back to the government. As far as I can delve into it, the current justification of the legality is that government is not collecting the information directly, but is instead purchasing it from 3rd parties, which somehow avoids scrutiny of constitutionality.

These efforts manifested recently during the Minnesota protests, where lawful citizens were tracked and photographed by ICE agents who accused them of conspiracies. One can only imagine how governments operating in bad faith could punish people for disagreeable opinions of said government.

Bad news bears.

@wildgrass said
[quote]You don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy against other people viewing your license plate and you voluntarily give the DMV the information it needs to register your car. So, if the government wants to access, keep, and read my DMV records or toll records to infer my travel habits, I don't have a problem with that. They're using data that's either accessible ...[text shortened]... s legal as interpreted by law enforcement, should it be? Surely one can write laws to prohibit this.

You mean tracking your whereabouts by planting a chip in my car without my consent? No.

You mean tracking your whereabouts by recording which tollbooths I go through or with road cameras? I don't have a problem with that. All that information is accessible anyway from the public domain. It's just a matter of collecting and storing it.

@sh76 said
You mean tracking your whereabouts by planting a chip in my car without my consent? No.

You mean tracking your whereabouts by recording which tollbooths I go through or with road cameras? I don't have a problem with that. All that information is accessible anyway from the public domain. It's just a matter of collecting and storing it.

What's the difference between planting a tracking chip in your car and tracking the location of your car via a nationally-integrated network of license plate-reading cameras?

@wildgrass said
What's the difference between planting a tracking chip in your car and tracking the location of your car via a nationally-integrated network of license plate-reading cameras?

The latter is visible from a public place where the is no expectation of privacy.

When I put my car on the road, I subject it to viewing by people and cameras in public.

@sh76 said
The latter is visible from a public place where the is no expectation of privacy.

When I put my car on the road, I subject it to viewing by people and cameras in public.

Combined with facial recognition, the warrantless deployment of networked camera technologies against innocent people walking or driving on any street in America creates a permanent and continuous tracking system for the government to monitor all Citizens.

The effect is exactly the same as embedding tracking chips on all of us.

I don't really care if it violates the 4th amendment or not, it all needs to go. Dystopian and unnecessary and wasteful and ripe for abuse.

@wildgrass said
Combined with facial recognition, the warrantless deployment of networked camera technologies against innocent people walking or driving on any street in America creates a permanent and continuous tracking system for the government to monitor all Citizens.

The effect is exactly the same as embedding tracking chips on all of us.

I don't really care if it violates the 4th amendment or not, it all needs to go. Dystopian and unnecessary and wasteful and ripe for abuse.

The government, through legislation or practice, can abstain from collecting the data, but I don't know how you're going to stop private parties from doing so.

Most people will check any acknowledgment box to get to the next page of whatever they're trying to do, and so all sorts of sites have permission to collect and use your data.

I don't see how you're going to unring that bell.

@sh76 said
The government, through legislation or practice, can abstain from collecting the data, but I don't know how you're going to stop private parties from doing so.

Most people will check any acknowledgment box to get to the next page of whatever they're trying to do, and so all sorts of sites have permission to collect and use your data.

I don't see how you're going to unring that bell.

Yeah it's the government buying the data from the private parties, that's the problem here. I don't really care otherwise, since those private parties don't have the authority to arrest and detain citizens.

I don't see how you're going to unring that bell.

How about just revise the 1974 privacy act so that it applies to the government acquiring personal data from 3rd party sources? Wouldn't that do it?

@wildgrass said
Yeah it's the government buying the data from the private parties, that's the problem here. I don't really care otherwise, since those private parties don't have the authority to arrest and detain citizens.

I don't see how you're going to unring that bell.

How about just revise the 1974 privacy act so that it applies to the government acquiring personal data from 3rd party sources? Wouldn't that do it?

You want the government to never be able to get data while investigating a crime from any third party source?

@sh76 said
You want the government to never be able to get data while investigating a crime from any third party source?

Not without a warrant, no.

@wildgrass said
Combined with facial recognition, the warrantless deployment of networked camera technologies against innocent people walking or driving on any street in America creates a permanent and continuous tracking system for the government to monitor all Citizens.

The effect is exactly the same as embedding tracking chips on all of us.

I don't really care if it violates the 4th amendment or not, it all needs to go. Dystopian and unnecessary and wasteful and ripe for abuse.

AND it violates the 4th Amendment.

@Suzianne said
AND it violates the 4th Amendment.

It's black letter, 1L criminal procedure law that the 4th Amendment does not limit the ability of the government to collect information that a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy over.

@sh76 said
It's black letter, 1L criminal procedure law that the 4th Amendment does not limit the ability of the government to collect information that a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy over.

The 4th Amendment disallows it if they try to do so without a warrant.

What about "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" is confusing?

This is as solid as the 2nd Amendment.

@sh76 said
It's black letter, 1L criminal procedure law that the 4th Amendment does not limit the ability of the government to collect information that a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy over.

To be seen by a real person, like a neighbor or a local police officer, is one thing but that's entirely different from the government recording your movements, annotating it with AI and storing it in a national database that is accessible without a warrant. Right?

Like, is it "reasonable" to expect that at all times outside of your house there will be a camera accessible to a name search by the government that will track and record you at all times?

Sorry, mate. That doesn't seem reasonable to me. Its mission creep from law enforcement into mass surveillance. We ought to be able to be anonymous unless and until we are subjects in a criminal investigation.

@Suzianne said
AND it violates the 4th Amendment.

I hope the tide is turning on this. It's getting ridiculous.

@wildgrass said
I hope the tide is turning on this. It's getting ridiculous.

People are aware. Flock cameras are being vandalized all over America.