Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by wateralien | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

wateralien·

Surely access to footage can be gated behind some sort of expedited digital court warrant?

I always think of that scene in Minority Report where 3 judges are conferenced in live when a “vision” arrived.

Because if used properly and lawfully these cameras can be useful to keep people safe. Including from the cops.

View on HN

You don't need a special speedy system. A regular warrant is just fine. A warrant in this case would never have been granted because there was no suspicion of wrongdoing. There's already processes for expedited search warrants outside of business hours, the problem is that warrants are simply never required to use these services.

Using minority report as an example of a good policing system is a bit unsettling.

> Surely access to footage can be gated behind some sort of expedited digital court warrant?

These are police-owned cameras filming public areas. A better solution would be to require court approval to buy and vote these cameras, or where they can be pointed.

In practice, the odds overwhelmingly favor abuse. And even if the "proper and lawful" version was somehow achieved, it would require constant maintenance, security, and expensive oversight that would also be at risk of degenerating back into abuse.

If abuse can’t be eliminated then it’s about what ratio of abuse to crime reduction is tolerable I guess. If we find 100 taken children while a dirty cop stalks his ex - is that tolerable? I’d say yes. If it became more abused I guess that’s when society needs to decide.

Abuse can be eliminated. It's called requiring a warrant. What's tolerable doesn't matter: we don't need to litigate how willing we are to bend the fourth amendment.

If you think judges who are unaccountable and regularly abuse their powers are a solution for oversight of surveillance, I have a bridge to sell you. (I don’t have a bridge.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com