Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Data-Fed Monitoring System Will Put New Yorkers Under Police Surveillance

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the if-this-isn't-creepy-you're-not-paying-attention dept.

Microsoft 259

Nerval's Lobster writes that New York City isn't just gathering data on citizens with cameras and other data sources for sifting through later to seek evidence in the event of violent acts; it's using some of that data in real-time in an attempt to reveal potential criminal activity. They've even picked a name for their system that echoes DARPA's Total Information Awareness, which I guess is more diplomatic than just calling it Precrime: "The Domain Awareness System will draw data from 911 calls, previous crime reports, license-plate readers, law-enforcement databases, environmental sensors, and roughly 3,000 closed-circuit cameras. It will rely on the New York City Wireless Network (NYCWiN), a high-speed wireless broadband infrastructure that allows city agencies to rapidly transmit data, and used for everything from emergency response to reading meters. Mayor Bloomberg argued that the system isn't an example of Big Brother overstepping the line. 'What you're seeing is what the private sector has used for a long time,' he told Gothamist. 'If you walk around with a cell phone, the cell phone company knows where you are. We're not your mom and pop's police department anymore.'"

cancel ×

259 comments

Oh that kooky Obama (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933637)

"And finally, Bos, I just want to say thank you for Youkilis." –joking at a fundraiser in Boston about the Red Sox trading their beloved slugger Kevin Youkilis to Chicago White Sox, Obama's hometown team. The line drew boos from the audience. (June 25, 2012)

"When I meet with world leaders, what's striking -- whether it's in Europe or here in Asia..." -mistakenly referring to Hawaii as Asia while holding a press conference outside Honolulu, Nov. 16, 2011

"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." —Cincinnati, OH, Sept. 22, 2011

"We're not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you're providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy." —on Wall Street reform, Quincy, Ill., April 29, 2010

"One such translator was an American of Haitian descent, representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in uniform do all around the world -- Navy Corpse-Man Christian Brossard." –mispronouncing "Corpsman" (the "ps" is silent) during a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., Feb. 5, 2010 (The Corpsman's name is also Christopher, not Christian)

"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries." --Tampa, Fla., Jan. 28, 2010

"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems." –attempting to make the case for government-run healthcare, while simultaneously undercutting his own argument, Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 11, 2009

"The Cambridge police acted stupidly." —commenting on a white police officer's arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home in Cambridge, Mass., at a news conference, July 22, 2009

"The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system." --in remarks after a health care roundtable with physicians, nurses and health care providers, Washington, D.C., July 20, 2009

"It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian, wheeling and dealing." --confusing German for "Austrian," a language which does not exist, Strasbourg, France, April 6, 2009

"No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something." --making an off-hand joke during an appearance on "The Tonight Show", March 19, 2009 (Obama later called the head of the Special Olympics to apologize)

"I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about doing any seances." --after saying he had spoken with all the living presidents as he prepared to take office, Washington, D.C., Nov. 7, 2008 (Obama later called Nancy Reagan to apologize)

"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -- defending his tax plan to Joe the Plumber, who argued that Obama's policy hurts small-business owners like himself, Toledo, Ohio, Oct. 12, 2008

"What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." --in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your Christian faith," which Obama quickly clarified (Watch video clip)

"I'm here with the Girardo family here in St. Louis." --speaking via satellite to the Democratic National Convention, while in Kansas City, Missouri, Aug. 25, 2008

"Let me introduce to you the next President -- the next Vice President of the United States of America, Joe Biden." --slipping up while introducing Joe Biden at their first joint campaign rally, Springfield, Illinois, Aug. 23, 2008

"Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee -- which is my committee -- a bill to call for divestment from Iran as way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon." --referring to a committee he is not on, Sderot, Israel, July 23, 2008

"Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's. It will be a strong friend of Israel's under a McCain...administration. It will be a strong friend of Israel's under an Obama administration. So that policy is not going to change." --Amman, Jordan, July 22, 2008

"How's it going, Sunshine?" --campaigning in Sunrise, Florida

"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."

"Hold on one second, sweetie, we're going to do -- we'll do a press avail." --to a female reporter for ABC's Detroit affiliate who asked about his plan to help American autoworkers (Watch video clip)

"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go." --at a campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon (Watch video clip)

"Why can't I just eat my waffle?" --after being asked a foreign policy question by a reporter while visiting a diner in Pennsylvania

"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." --explaining his troubles winning over some working-class voters

"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person, who, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature of race in our society."

"Come on! I just answered, like, eight questions." --exasperated by reporters after a news conference

"You're likeable enough, Hillary." --during a Democratic debate

"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died -- an entire town destroyed." --on a Kansas tornado that killed 12 people

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933693)

The more you troll the less people listen to you.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933729)

You're welcome.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (0, Troll)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 years ago | (#40933749)

Remarkably on-topic.

Once everyone has their every waking moment recorded, let's see how many offhand comments, politically-incorrect statements, and slip-of-the-tongue mistakes you make. I bet it'll be more than 28 in four years.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933833)

57 states slip of the tongue! Haahahahhahhahhhahaha. That's pretty good. Careful there, there's some brown stuff on your nose.

Forget all that, can you just imagine how this would be played were these 'slips of the tongue' spoken by Bush? This would be front page headlines for the next century and beyond. Do not even try and tell me otherwise.

You tools.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 2 years ago | (#40934085)

Bush mispoke just as many times, and surprise surprise they aren't front page headlines less than a decade later let along for the next century.

Just like week I called someoe "Anna" when their name was actually "Anne" - you would have been amazed.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933791)

Sea kelp.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933977)

I told you already I am, I am seeking more conservative voters.

This means you. Awake from your trance statist, use the brain that god gave you for a change.

Or perhaps you like your welfare checks and living in moms basement. Your choice.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (1)

xevioso (598654) | about 2 years ago | (#40934381)

Only idiots vote for people based on what they say and how many times they misspeak.

The difference between Bush and Obama is that Bush's policies were just as stupid as the crap that spewed from his drawling mouth.

Re:Oh that kooky Obama (1)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 2 years ago | (#40934411)

I really hope you get paid for sloshing this tripe all over the intertubes. If not, well that would be a very sad story. On the bright side, I guess it's the result of the Citizens United decision creating jobs. Go SCOTUS!

Bit Flipping... (2)

3seas (184403) | about 2 years ago | (#40933643)

How many times have we heard one thing said and the opposite done?

Re:Bit Flipping... (1)

garyoa1 (2067072) | about 2 years ago | (#40933725)

That would be 184,576.03 times.

Film at 11.

Re:Bit Flipping... (1)

Ghubi (1102775) | about 2 years ago | (#40933773)

Every time

Re:Bit Flipping... (3, Funny)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 2 years ago | (#40934035)

Best of all, if they catch a new mother feeding her baby formula or some guy trying to supersize his Coke at McDonalds, they can have the SWAT team their in minutes!

The problem (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933647)

"We're not your mom and pop's police department anymore." That's the problem Mr. Bloomberg.

Re:The problem (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#40933895)

I wonder if they're going to try to come up with new names for the Ministry of Truth and Ministry of Love.....or just go ahead and follow the blueprint the rest of the way through unchanged....?

Re:The problem (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 2 years ago | (#40935609)

Please. This is microsoft setting up the system. I wouldn't be surprised if this has a Microsoft-esque marketing campaign attached.

"it's for your own benefit, and there are safeguards in place to prevent abuse" etc etc. (all while being untrue)

Re:The problem (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#40934013)

The real problem is that there are now so many laws that everyone is a criminal, you can't even tell for certain whether what you're doing is illegal because it may be hidden in an obscure paragraph on page 10,799 of the 'Think Of The Children Act 2003' and if every law was enforced the entire economy would shut down.

Re:The problem (3, Informative)

Sentrion (964745) | about 2 years ago | (#40935131)

And the laws are so vague that nobody knows if you're really guilty until a judge says so. It's such problem that lawyers today usually advise against taking advantage of some new law until the law has been "tested" in court. It is not unheard of that a person can be complying with law a and compying with law b, but when doing so simultaneously without complying with law c they are guilty of some horrendous crime and must spend years in prison for what most people would perceive as routine day-to-day business.

Import business can be very scary because you can be tried and imprisoned in the US for violating the law of some other country, even when that other country sends diplomats and sworn affidavits that their laws were not violated.

You don't even have to break any known laws. A judge can simply find you in contempt and leave you to rot in prison for six years, at his sole discretion.

How did a crook like Bloomberg (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 2 years ago | (#40935321)

... ever become mayor of a city like New York. That's what I wonder.

As far as I recall the big Apple used to be one of the the freest places
a critical thinker could live in. Now it it seems just like a reactionaries'
hub.

And why don't Newyorkers just give this guy Bloomberg the boot.

Unsubscribe (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933669)

Mayor Bloomberg argued that the system isn't an example of Big Brother overstepping the line. 'What you're seeing is what the private sector has used for a long time,' he told Gothamist. 'If you walk around with a cell phone, the cell phone company knows where you are. We're not your mom and pop's police department anymore.'"

The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system. I am able to choose whether I want to allow the private sector to know where I am by not buying a cell phone. Big difference there, chief.

Re:Unsubscribe (2)

garcia (6573) | about 2 years ago | (#40933755)

The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system. I am able to choose whether I want to allow the private sector to know where I am by not buying a cell phone. Big difference there, chief.

Exactly. And the oft-misquoted saying that applies here doesn't need to be repeated but I would rather be one of a few thousand people to die due to criminal activity than have the Mayor of NYC tracking my every move because he can.

Re:Unsubscribe (1, Troll)

jhoegl (638955) | about 2 years ago | (#40933781)

I believe you can "opt-out" by moving to another country.
Or in this case, another city.

Re:Unsubscribe (2)

KhabaLox (1906148) | about 2 years ago | (#40934911)

Or in this case, another city.

Tell that to Muslims in New Jersey. [google.com]

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | about 2 years ago | (#40935061)

Right, how simple that is. I can just... move to another city! Well, when someone gives someone enough money to, they can.

Re:Unsubscribe (0, Troll)

nschubach (922175) | about 2 years ago | (#40935827)

If I went out and sold all my stuff ... I'd have plenty of money to move to another state, maybe even a different country. Even if I didn't sell all my stuff, looking at U-haul rates right now ... ~200 miles is about $300-$400 which is enough to get you out of pretty much any state. If you can't save a couple hundred bucks... you have bigger issues than big brother.

Re:Unsubscribe (2)

Mitreya (579078) | about 2 years ago | (#40933811)

The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system. I am able to choose whether I want to allow the private sector to know where I am by not buying a cell phone.

Also, the private sector uses that information to serve me. The cell phone company knows where I am because they need to connect my calls.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40934061)

Also, the private sector uses that information to serve me.

They use the information to serve their stockholders. Sometimes, that also involves serving the people from whom the information is gathered, sometimes it involves using are distributing that information in ways that are against the interests of the people from whom it was gathered.

Not really all that different from government, really.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

icebike (68054) | about 2 years ago | (#40934441)

They use the information to serve their stockholders. Sometimes, that also involves serving the people from whom the information is gathered, sometimes it involves using are distributing that information in ways that are against the interests of the people from whom it was gathered.

It has nothing to do with shareholders.
Shareholders would be the first to demand the cell carriers stop handing over cell records to any tin-star sheriff if that were legally possible.
It ads cost, and has no possible upside. Other than that, cell carriers do not use my location for anything except tower load planning.

Re:Unsubscribe (3, Insightful)

Artraze (600366) | about 2 years ago | (#40933901)

And, more to the point, the cell phone company can't put people in jail. They aren't going to be searching that data to "discover" crimes. (Collect enough data and statistically you can 'prove' almost anything). If anything, their incentive is to ignore it as much as possible: Not only because it limits their liability in case something happens that they missed, but also because people is jail aren't buying cell phones.

Re:Unsubscribe (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#40933903)

The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system.

You can always replace the people who run it. You can actually vote for change, should you accept the challenge. Either way, private or public, the power is in our hands, and when things go wrong, especially on the chronic time scale we're looking at, we have nobody but ourselves to blame. We enable both the dictator and the industrialist who props him up.

Re:Unsubscribe (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#40933931)

You can always replace the people who run it.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#40934015)

Peoples' choice. There are no laws that restrict who you can vote for. And there's space for write-in candidates.

Re:Unsubscribe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934055)

Tried that. Any more suggestions?

Re:Unsubscribe (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#40934065)

Peoples' choice. There are no laws that restrict who you can vote for.

If voting could make a difference, it would be banned. At best, if you dedicate months of your life to doing so, you can replace one guy at the top, who then has to deal with a huge entrenched bureaucracy that wants more money and power and will do whatever it can to get rid of them.

Do you really think, for example, that if Americans were given a free choice of who should be candidates for President this year they would pick... Obama and Romney? There's no better choice in the country than those two?

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#40934135)

...if Americans were given a free choice of who should be candidates for President this year they would pick... Obama and Romney?

Can you point to me any regulation that stipulates that they must vote for Obama or Romney? American DO have a free choice who to vote for. That they don't exercise it is no fault of the government's.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934241)

Maybe it doesn't make a difference at the national level. My vote sure doesn't--Mass. last went Republican for Reagan, in 1984, so it's almost a foregone conclusion that my state's electoral votes are going to go to the Democratic candidate. But things like who your state representative or city selectman are make a huge difference in your quality of life. Those folks are accessible enough that you can talk to them directly and a small group of concerned citizens can affect how they vote. They're also early enough in their political careers, as a rule, that the cynicism that afflicts so many career politicians hasn't set in yet. That's why I vote--to vote for those offices. By voting in those elections you also get to pick who will run for higher offices in the future. Today's town selectman is tomorrow's state representative, who's next week's Senator from your state. Republicans figured this out in the 1970s and ran people for everything under the sun including dogcatcher so they could groom the next generation of officeholders.

Re:Unsubscribe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934895)

Anybody who voted for Reagan should not be allowed to vote ever again, and actually should be deported as anti-American. And don't blame your losses on "the system". You lost because the majority voted the other way.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

Stirling Newberry (848268) | about 2 years ago | (#40935145)

If you are a consumer of politics, you get to choose what is put on the shelf for you.

There are laws restricting who you can elect (2)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40934105)

There are no laws that restrict who you can vote for.

Sure there are, at least if you want your vote to count. There are laws that restrict who can be elected to each and every elected public office in the country. Sometimes, the restrictions are things like age, citizenship, and duration of residency in a particular region, but sometimes they are more involved.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#40934295)

You can actually vote for change, should you accept the challenge.

Millions of people took that challenge in 2008, and they got yet another crook. You can vote for change, yes, but you won't get it.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#40934471)

There was plenty of time to properly vet the man. I'm not cutting any slack on this one. And what's worse is that few people are putting up any resistance to the party (both factions) with its fraud being perpetrated in broad daylight, and he will be reelected. Nope... The man in the mirror is the one to blame.

Re:Unsubscribe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40935845)

There was plenty of time to properly vet the man. I'm not cutting any slack on this one.

What were voters vetting? That Obama, as shittastic as he is, isn't quite the complete catastrophe that a McCain/Palin presidency would've been?

The idea that individual Americans get to choose who they put in office is hilarious. No, we don't - by virtue of democratic influence on our Republic.

Sorry kids, this isn't buying a table for your living room. Your fellow Americans combine to choose who you can elect. And unlike the table, you can't go to a woodsmith and have something completely custom crafted.

Re:Unsubscribe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40935897)

The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system.

You can always replace the people who run it. You can actually vote for change, should you accept the challenge. Either way, private or public, the power is in our hands, and when things go wrong, especially on the chronic time scale we're looking at, we have nobody but ourselves to blame. We enable both the dictator and the industrialist who props him up.

Except too many morons want the government to solve all their problems, but then turn around and complain that the government misuses the power they just gave it to solve those problems.

YOU WANT GOV'T HEALTH CARE, THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT THE PATRIOT ACT!!!!

You want taxes raised to pay for "investments" and so everyone "pays their fair share"?

THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT WARRANTLESS WIRETAPS

Seriously - if you want to give the government all the power to solve all your problems, you really have no room to complain when that power is misused.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40933971)

>>>The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system.

After CISPA passes (or some other annoying acronym like SOPA or FEAR), there won't be any difference. The executive branch of the state or central government will just demand the cellphone company turn-over their records of where you've been. No need for a signature from the judicial branch either. No checks/balances required.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

icebike (68054) | about 2 years ago | (#40934537)

Too late. Already been done [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Unsubscribe (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 2 years ago | (#40934249)

The difference here is that I am not allowed to opt-out of the government's system.

Nor does AT&T have the power of arrest and detention.

Standing up and saying its not Big Brother doesn't make it so.
The sad part is New Yorkers will probably go for this in a heart beat. All you need to do is whisper World Trade Center, and all opposition voices will be drowned out. Take it from me, my sister lords it over me every time this type of issue comes up because she was 6 blocks away on 9/11.

You can't have it both ways (1, Interesting)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 2 years ago | (#40935593)

Nor does AT&T have the power of arrest and detention.

Standing up and saying its not Big Brother doesn't make it so. The sad part is New Yorkers will probably go for this in a heart beat. All you need to do is whisper World Trade Center, and all opposition voices will be drowned out. Take it from me, my sister lords it over me every time this type of issue comes up because she was 6 blocks away on 9/11.

Have you ever lived/worked in N.Y.C.? You've got some seriously dangerous animals who have no human compassion at all in them. And thanks to video, face recognition and cell tracking these heartless criminals are getting caught more and more. If having to give up some "in public" privacy means my sisters are safer when there, then HELL YES! Take my photo! Recognize my face and track my damn phone! I don't do illegal things, and don't care if I get stop & frisked for weapons. You can't be against public surveillance then complain later when you or your loved ones get mugged/raped/killed. Welcome to the modern life.

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 2 years ago | (#40935141)

Michael Bloomberg is a pompous, egotistical, authoritarian windbag. He has implemented or expanded a variety of obnoxiously authoritarian measures during his tenure, not least of which is the "Stop and Frisk" [wikipedia.org] insanity.

What is more, Hizzonor contravened the will of his constituents by modifying the term limits law [wikipedia.org] (which the people of NYC directly voted for *twice*) in cahoots with the 85% of the city council who would have had to leave office because of the law.

So I for one am not surprised by the effort by Bloomie and his lackey Ray Kelly [wikipedia.org] to further the police state in NYC.

The saddest part about this is that Mayor Bloomberg isn't as huge a jackass as his predecessor, Rudy [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Unsubscribe (1)

WML MUNSON (895262) | about 2 years ago | (#40935625)

Bloomberg is correct in a way: The motivations of both parties are the same. They both want to control your behavior.

The Difference (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933685)

The difference, of course, is that only government holds the special "right" to employ physical force as a business model. Private business can only hurt you with the blessing of government. Government can hurt you at will, and with no recourse.

Re:The Difference (1)

speed_rrracer (802714) | about 2 years ago | (#40934747)

The difference, of course, is that only government holds the special "right" to employ physical force as a business model. Private business can only hurt you with the blessing of government. Government can hurt you at will, and with no recourse.

not only government

For the time being, we still have this thing called the 2nd Amendment. It's purpose is to remind the government that the people have the special right to employ physical force as a corrective measure against tyrannical governments.

Re:The Difference (2)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about 2 years ago | (#40935709)

You're a moron. If the US becomes a tyranny, it will be because a majority of the US voters want one. You don't need the second amendment to throw out the government in a properly working democracy. You only need it if you disagree with the results of the majority, and think that the current state of affairs entitles you to shoot those who you disagree with.

The fantasy that a democratically elected government will suddenly turn on you like a rabid animal is an utter fantasy that has zero precedent in history. For every example that you bring up, I will show you how it happened with the tacit approval of the power structure in the country, or because the government had been dissolved and replaced by an authoritarian regime - generally after a significant armed struggle took place. And no matter how few guns are in place before an armed struggle takes place, there's going to be a flood of weapons available during it.

In short, your second amendment will either be completely redundant (there's already a war going on, and the constitution is going to be ignored right and left), or should be unused (the ballot still works).

Re:The Difference (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40935885)

For the time being, we still have this thing called the 2nd Amendment. It's purpose is to remind the government that the people have the special right to employ physical force as a corrective measure against tyrannical governments.

"Go ahead. Make my day." ~Government

Re:The Difference (1)

NettiWelho (1147351) | about 2 years ago | (#40935451)

Government can hurt you at will, and with no recourse.

If that was the case, US would still be part of the British empire.

Re:The Difference (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about 2 years ago | (#40935517)

Private business can only hurt you with the blessing of government. Government can hurt you at will, and with no recourse.

Correction: private business can hurt you either with the blessing of government, or in the absence of government. Government, in a democracy (and yes, the US is a type of democracy), can hurt you for as long as people are voted in who hurt you.

The benefit of democracy isn't representation. The benefit is the bloodless revolution and changing of the guard that is possible every X years. The benefit of private business isn't that it is an optional relationship. It's that its power is checked by everyone making up the private business sector.

Re:The Difference (1)

NettiWelho (1147351) | about 2 years ago | (#40935679)

The benefit of democracy isn't representation. The benefit is the bloodless revolution and changing of the guard that is possible every X years.

Too bad that the US is locked in perpetual cycle of 'meet the new boss same as the old boss' because of its 2 party system.

Re:The Difference (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about 2 years ago | (#40935797)

Which has all to do with voter education, and nothing with the usefulness of the second amendment.

So what? (5, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | about 2 years ago | (#40933707)

If you walk around with a cell phone, the cell phone company knows where you are

And if I have a bank account, then the bank knows how much money I have or what all my transactions are. That doesn't mean police gets to use that information indiscriminately/without a warrant.

Re:So what? (2)

denis-The-menace (471988) | about 2 years ago | (#40935011)

Do you see the mention of warrants in his proposal?

None

It's all automatic like DMCA takedowns.
Guilty until proven innocent.

Hijab (1)

bugs2squash (1132591) | about 2 years ago | (#40933717)

What we need is the human equivalent of license plate "protectors". I foresee a new fashion trend...

Re:Hijab (3, Funny)

Nkwe (604125) | about 2 years ago | (#40933881)

What we need is the human equivalent of license plate "protectors". I foresee a new fashion trend...

You mean like a hoodie?

Re:Hijab (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | about 2 years ago | (#40934087)

which then causes a law to be passed that within X feet of "critical locations" it is a crime to have your hood UP.

btw in NC it is illegal to have anything covering/obscuring the plate

You mean the same wireless network... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933801)

That was shown to be hopelessly insecure at this year's DefCon?

http://t.co/hQLAwPg5

Why MS logo on the header? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933847)

I dont get it.. what's microsoft have to do with this??

Re:Why MS logo on the header? (1)

gregulator (756993) | about 2 years ago | (#40934309)

They built the system FOR the NYPD.

They also are doing some sort of a profit sharing venture with the NYPD on this software.

Re:Why MS logo on the header? (1)

gtirloni (1531285) | about 2 years ago | (#40934469)

NYPD and profit sharing?

System Will Put New Yorkers Under Police Surveilla (2)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about 2 years ago | (#40933851)

>> System Will Put New Yorkers Under Police Surveillance

This is a great idea... in Soviet Russia.

Re:System Will Put New Yorkers Under Police Survei (2)

ApplePy (2703131) | about 2 years ago | (#40933999)

Soviet Russia's KGB in its wildest wet dreams never imagined the level of Big Brother surveillance that the US government/corporate partnership could put into place here with modern technology. By contrast, the Soviet citizen of 1980 had far more privacy and anonymity.

Why are you so bitter? (3, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40933873)

That would be the response from my "friends" if I posted this on facebook. They just don't see anything wrong with this level of surveillance (or police ramming-down your door and shooting you).

Re:Why are you so bitter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934079)

Well, it's better to let oneself die or be abused than stand out, you know?

Re:Why are you so bitter? (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | about 2 years ago | (#40935361)

Maybe they believe the society described in 1984 is a utopia, or that when someone gets into the government, they become perfect beings incapable of making mistakes or abusing their powers.

Just the beginning (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933885)

This being North America, just watch, all that data will soon be leased to advertisement firms for even more brainwa.. err.. targeted advertisement.

What does this have to do with Microsoft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40933893)

Just curious?

"We're not your mom and pop's police department" (3, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | about 2 years ago | (#40933961)

No. You're our Big Brother's police department.

Even in public, I value my privacy (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#40934001)

@Mitreya: the police can and do seize cell location data without warrant, I've seen it happen (in the referred instance it did put a man away for 18-to-life for burning down his parent's house, nearly killing his entire family. When information like that is referred to in a court of Law, warrant or not the jury can't unhear what's been said no matter how adamantly the judge insists on it. That unwarranted seizure is the ONLY thing that put the guy away).

Which is why the cellphone stays HOME. Where I go and what I do is my business. Take it as read that my activities are completely lawful.
I carry a simplex personal mobile radio in case I need to communicate with anyone out of earshot. The people I need to talk to have similar equipment. The only time the thing transmits is when I key that button.

Sad (4, Insightful)

Mephistophocles (930357) | about 2 years ago | (#40934017)

Mayor Bloomberg argued that the system isn't an example of Big Brother overstepping the line.

That shouldn't even be up for debate here. If we're taking up that debate with the Mayor, then we've already fallen for his straw-man and are missing the point completely. Of COURSE it's overstepping the line; that's obvious and doesn't need debate. The real problem here is that New Yorkers aren't fighting stuff like this for all they're worth - non-violent whenever possible, violent when necessary. And yes, that's constitutionally protected free speech.

For now, Bloomberg, you evil fiend, I hope this at least destroys whatever tourist traffic is left in the big apple. I, for one, will not ever be traveling to your city as long as this crap exists (and it's a shame, because there is much about New York that I love).

Re:Sad (1)

ks*nut (985334) | about 2 years ago | (#40935347)

It is sad. I loved going to New York when I lived in New Jersey and could get there by bus. I have vowed to never travel by air as long as the overzealous TSA/DHS tactics remain. It's a pity because I would love to see the Cloisters again and spend some time in lower Manhattan just to see the Village and old WTC site, Natural History Museum, Times Square. And it's not progress, it's stupidity.

Re:Sad (1)

akb (39826) | about 2 years ago | (#40935471)

non-violent whenever possible, violent when necessary. And yes, that's constitutionally protected free speech.

I was unaware that violence was Constitutionally protected speech. Please explain.

Re:Sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40935773)

I like how you accidentally copied the part about about tourist traffic, especially since it's the most unrealistic idea in your post. What fraction of tourists visiting New York are even going to know about this, or would even care if they did?

Sounds good to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934051)

Great, so we'll be able to use the exact same system to monitor police brutality and illegal acts and be able to swiftly bring the perpetrators to justice. If the police have no problem using the system on us then they can't have a problem with us using it on them... right?

Person of interest, anyone? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934053)

(the TV show, ofc)

CrimeRank (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934097)

10 years from now...

Narrator: Much like web pages have a Google Pagerank, we can give people a CrimeRank based on how likely they are to commit a crime based on who there seen near or who they are connected to, along with analysis of behavior patterns. When their crimerank gets to high we just send the drones out to track them and incapacitate them until the authorities arrive. The whole thing can run completely automated and everything will be just fine as long as we never turn it off. If we turn it off, their will be chaos. If the defendent asks why he was arrested we will tell him that the algorithm is secret .... so we can't tell him. If people knew how the algorithm worked then they would find ways around it and we can't have that! Before all this police relied on guesswork and unreliable or intimidated witnesses and inconvienient and difficult to process material evidece to make their case. Thankfully, with CrimeRank, we just push a button, the drones fly out and the crime problem is solved!

What happened to NYPD? (1)

Mister_Stoopid (1222674) | about 2 years ago | (#40934119)

Seriously, what happened? Have they always been a mustache-twirling, comically evil organization? Did they make Lex Luthor the police chief on 9/12/2001?

Not reassuring. (4, Insightful)

Eevee (535658) | about 2 years ago | (#40934161)

We're not your mom and pop's police department anymore.'"

Becoming the Stasi [wikipedia.org] isn't an improvement.

Businesss... government... it's still big brother. (3, Interesting)

sl3xd (111641) | about 2 years ago | (#40934271)

Businesses shouldn't be allowed to collect data that the government can't.

Government shouldn't be allowed to collect data because "the private sector already does this."

I had the misfortune to attend a conference a few weeks ago where salesmen were being taught about "big data" by marketdroids.

These guys were drooling about wholesale intrusion into the most private aspects of our lives.

It really is the rise of big brother. The fact that it is a corporation instead of government is of little practical value; monitoring data gives those who have it power, and that power will always be abused - and will result in ruined or destroyed lives, reduced freedom, and corrupt leadership (whether government or corporate).

Data-fed? (1)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | about 2 years ago | (#40934283)

What, exactly, is a non data-fed monitoring system? What exactly would it monitor if not data?

Doesn't justify (1)

Skapare (16644) | about 2 years ago | (#40934355)

Just because the private sector is doing wrong things, it doesn't justify the city doing wrong things.

New York City sounds like Hell (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934363)

Just another perfect example out of many why I have no desire whatsoever to set foot in New York City.
So many people crammed into an overpriced concrete jungle with no privacy and no rights... sounds like Hell to me.

Corruption is the problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40934563)

I understand why 'big brother' makes a person who considers themselves free, deeply suspicious. However surely the problem is not the system but the corrupt entities that may attempt to use the system for nefarious purposes.

Whatever your version of what big brother may be, the fact is that the technology required to deliver such a system will happen. We should be discussing the benefits of such a system, and discussing some air tight laws to define how such a system is used and that it cannot ever be corrupted.

Fighting against the inevitable only has one conclusion.

Re:Corruption is the problem. (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | about 2 years ago | (#40935395)

Uh, no. They're the government. As long as people pay attention and actually do something, they can be controlled. That's being optimistic, but it's at least possible.

So rather than having useless laws that won't stop abuse, just get rid of the systems that allow for abuse unless they're absolutely essential.

Patriots! (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#40934645)

> that echoes DARPA'sTotal Information Awareness,
> which I guess is more diplomatic than just calling it Precrime

And way, way, wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more diplomatic than calling it Big Brother.

Four less years! (1)

doglikegroove (979723) | about 2 years ago | (#40934649)

This is what happens when the greatest city in the world lets a jackal co-opt a third term.

AT&T know where you are, we want to be like th (1)

KhabaLox (1906148) | about 2 years ago | (#40934817)

Mayor Bloomberg argued that the system isn't an example of Big Brother overstepping the line. 'What you're seeing is what the private sector has used for a long time,' he told Gothamist. 'If you walk around with a cell phone, the cell phone company knows where you are. We're not your mom and pop's police department anymore.'"

How in the hell is that statement supposed to make me feel comfortable?

Do it to the police too. (4, Interesting)

gurps_npc (621217) | about 2 years ago | (#40934977)

Every single room in a police station (aside from the bathrooms) and every single police car should be under constant surveillance, going directly to the Internal Affairs office, and is also recorded and retained for a minimum of 10 years.

If the video is not shown, then by law, the cops should not be allowed to testify about what they saw, heard, said, or did. I.e. it should be assumed that the cops destroyed the evidence to allow them to lie.

Name (1)

fa2k (881632) | about 2 years ago | (#40935189)

"Total Information Awareness" sounds pretty horrible, if *that* is the euphemism.

Evil (1)

UPZ (947916) | about 2 years ago | (#40935205)

We'll just monitor your location, vehicles, assets, homes, phone lines, internet activity, body temperature, bowel movements, brain activity and a few more.. oh, and of your spouse and children too...who said anything about big brother?

6 months? (2)

Budgreen (561093) | about 2 years ago | (#40935357)

It's been in use for 6 months already. and the public is just now finding out?

Bloomburger (1)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 2 years ago | (#40935389)

"...private companies already do it"
The difference Mr Bloomberg is that the private company doesn't claim the right to fine, tax and impound your whole existence for little more than breathing.

It Can't Happen Here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40935665)

Mayor Berzelius Windrip argued that the system isn't an example of Big Brother overstepping the line.

FTFY.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...