- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- technews@radiation.party
- Skoobie ( @Skoobie@lemmy.film ) English29•1 year ago
So this means I’m allowed to fly my drone over prison yards then, right?
Edit: Also, doesn’t that then make it legal for folks to capture the drones? It’s on their property.
- Rai ( @Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 12•1 year ago
What are they even looking for?
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English12•1 year ago
I honestly don’t know. Maybe they could equipt them with powerful microphones that can record the conversations of the people below. They would help with putting a stop to thought crime. The police could then use automated speech analysis to determine if you are comiting thought crime and activate the appropriate response.
Afyer the initial reponse they could remove the person and their friends and family from society. It would be a challenging task updating the records to show that these terrorists never existed. You would also need to make sure that the people around are aware that there own memories are wrong.
They don’t have a specific objective, and that’s the problem.
- elouboub ( @elouboub@kbin.social ) 3•1 year ago
Did you even read the article?
- cobra89 ( @cobra89@beehaw.org ) 11•1 year ago
“If a caller states there’s a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, we’re going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party,”
What does “check on” mean? It really doesn’t say what they’re looking for, just an arbitrary description of “large crowd”.
- melroy ( @melroy@kbin.melroy.org ) 4•1 year ago
The party will just be aborted and stopped. Obviously…
- hglman ( @hglman@lemmy.ml ) English6•1 year ago
Check-on and stop are not the same. Why do you need a drone if you’re going to stop the party?
- melroy ( @melroy@kbin.melroy.org ) 1•1 year ago
I don’t think we should allow those drones in the first place to be honest. The west is becoming more and more like China.
- DahGangalang ( @DahGangalang@infosec.pub ) 3•1 year ago
Like, if there was a restrictions to how large a party can be (say in response to the current wave of COVID cases), this would make sense.
I disagree with this being a reasonable measure, but at least it would make sense as to why they want to do it, ya know?
As it is, it sounds like NYPD is just trying to use all their budget so they don’t lose it next year or whatever.
- jasondj ( @jasondj@ttrpg.network ) 3•1 year ago
The cops will show up, drink all your bud light, eat a few burgers, and taze your grandmother.
Best way to prevent this is to just not allow shitty beer at your party.
- krolden ( @krolden@lemmy.ml ) 2•1 year ago
Political organizers
- cobra89 ( @cobra89@beehaw.org ) 12•1 year ago
Cory Doctorow was right.
- library_napper ( @library_napper@monyet.cc ) 9•1 year ago
Abolish the NYPD
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The New York City police department plans to pilot the unmanned aircrafts in response to complaints about large gatherings, including private events, over Labor Day weekend, officials announced Thursday.
The plan drew immediate backlash from privacy and civil liberties advocates, raising questions about whether such drone use violated existing laws for police surveillance
“It’s a troubling announcement and it flies in the face of the POST Act,” said Daniel Schwarz, a privacy and technology strategist at the New York Civil Liberties Union, referring to a 2020 city law that requires the NYPD to disclose its surveillance tactics.
The move was announced during a security briefing focused on J’ouvert, an annual Caribbean festival marking the end of slavery that brings thousands of revelers and a heavy police presence to the streets of Brooklyn.
But as the technology proliferates, privacy advocates say regulations have not kept up, opening the door to intrusive surveillance that would be illegal if conducted by a human police officer.
Cahn, the privacy advocate, said city officials should be more transparent with the public about how police are currently using drones, with clear guardrails that prevent surveillance overreach in the future.
The original article contains 578 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!