zlacker

[return to "US customs and border protection is flying a surveillance drone over Minneapolis"]
1. pm90+Qf[view] [source] 2020-05-29 18:33:49
>>pera+(OP)
This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically.

Despite that, its a dangerous thing to happen. I am aware of how unlikely it is for the current US Government to use the drone offensively, but once you have a massive fleet of drones flying over the US, patrolling "troubling" neighborhoods constantly, the temptation to use those abilities rises significantly.

I hope that Congress takes action to outlaw this practice, but I have little faith it will happen. It seems like everyday the country is falling further into the pit of becoming an authoritarian police state.

◧◩
2. beambo+Mg[view] [source] 2020-05-29 18:37:26
>>pm90+Qf
Where do you draw the distinction between a drone (presumably unarmed) vs a police helicopter?
◧◩◪
3. Alupis+QH[view] [source] 2020-05-29 21:01:19
>>beambo+Mg
I think we first need to determine what is upsetting about this, specifically.

Is it that they are flying a UAV that was originally designed for military use?

Or is it that they are flying a UAV period?

What if it was a new UAV, designed just for law enforcement? No problems then?

Presumably this UAV has no weapons on it, so I'm unsure what the problem could be unless we just flat oppose former military equipment being used?

It's safer and cheaper to fly a UAV than a manned vehicled - helicopters crash routinely and need multiple crews to keep them on station for extended duration. If it was a decommissioned military UAV that's being repurposed - then the tax payer has been saved a great deal of money as well.

So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?

◧◩◪◨
4. adimit+bP[view] [source] 2020-05-29 21:50:02
>>Alupis+QH
> What if it was a new UAV, designed just for law enforcement? No problems then?

Fewer problems. Presumably it would be much less capable. The sister comment[1] lays out how dangerous this UAV is, and how powerful. History has shown that the police/military are eager to gain capabilities, and very reluctant to part with them. If use of these very capable military grade drones becomes wide-spread, using them aggressively against live people becomes more probable. And very easy to do — they're already everywhere.

We should also think about how regulated their use should be! These have the capability to just provide 24h surveillance on certain areas, which would erode citizens' privacy greatly.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23354643

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. Alupis+lX[view] [source] 2020-05-29 22:42:31
>>adimit+bP
> These have the capability to just provide 24h surveillance on certain areas, which would erode citizens' privacy greatly

How so? Public spaces have already been ruled over and over to have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Further, the plethora of surveillance cameras sitting in store windows, people's doorbells, streetlight cameras, and more already surveil anyone in any public area.

Is it just these UAV's are more visible so they make you think about it more?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. michae+Tm1[view] [source] 2020-05-30 02:48:53
>>Alupis+lX
Different methodologies of surveillance have different costs, capabilities, and potential risks. In theory anyone stepping outside of their door could be observed at any time but in practice personal observation is very expensive and potentially obvious. Non network cameras controlled by a plethora of individual business owners might paint on net a very detailed picture of a persons comings and goings but acquiring and correlating that data likely limits it to discovering comings and goings in a limited geographical and temporal area of interest because of a major crime.

Pervasive cheap surveillance which needn't be attached to a very expensive mobile weapons platform or be limited to just cameras could be a birds eye view of everyone's lives. Good justifiable benefits are obvious. With enough surveillance crime becomes really hard to perpetrate. We can pick out all the drug dealers and make tons of arrests before people adapt. Petty stupid crime like breaking into a car means the eye of Sauron sees you and follows you back to your house. Acts of violence that don't take place inside buildings could prompt an immediate response at least as fast as the cops are capable of dispatching a unit. Acts of violence within a unit could be detected by mikes outside on street corners if we were even more surveillance minded. Perhaps we can train it to detect the sound of a person being beat. I don't like people getting hurt do you? Acts of terrorism or mass violence are even more important to prevent. With enough smarts maybe we can flag people likely to go postal or at least notice what is happening 30 seconds before the shooting starts. 30 seconds before instead of 2 minutes after might make a HUGE difference in body count.

As great as that sounds I'm sure you can think of 100 more dystopian use cases. It doesn't do us much good to treat cars as faster horses and not bothering to consider the implications.

[go to top]