News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by Jon_Lowtek on Thursday October 22, 2020 @08:04PM (#24864715)
Why would you have any reasonable expectation to have privacy in your house? There are cameras and microphones in your home, build into hardware devices you neither understand nor control, which are permanently connected to their corporate control servers. While you watch TV the TV watches you, while you shop in an online store, the store takes note what products you look at, and when you call your mom, your call is automatically transcribed and scanned for vile evilness by agencies that will defend the secrecy of their methods with violence against the general population.

Your argument about public spaces works just as well for private spaces. If this trend continues there will be no reasonable expectations of privacy at all.

Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by DrScump on Friday October 23, 2020 @04:12AM (#24867101)
Why would you have any reasonable expectation to have privacy in your house?

Americans do.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by xapata on Friday October 23, 2020 @02:49PM (#24872554)
Well, that's not really a "right to privacy" except in how it's been interpreted in court. So, Common Law says it we have the right, because of the precedent of past interpretations. The precedent also holds that the meaning of the right to privacy will drift over time as technology changes.
Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by Jon_Lowtek on Friday October 23, 2020 @11:13PM (#24876646)
It is not an "unreasonable search" if you install the cloud-enabled camera that is embedded in some other device yourself and click ok on a ten page legal contract you didn't read.
Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by xapata on Thursday October 22, 2020 @09:13PM (#24865129)
No, you're twisting my words, or simply misinterpreting. The expectation in public is that random individuals have the right to photograph you.
Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by Jon_Lowtek on Thursday October 22, 2020 @09:21PM (#24865160)
your words where: "due to the shift in reasonable expectations, soon people will have no (expectation of a) right to privacy in a public space"

I am not twisting that, i am just saying the same applies to "in your home"

Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by xapata on Thursday October 22, 2020 @09:48PM (#24865256)
There's a big difference between purchasing devices that have user agreements and interacting with others in public.
Re:Activists turn facial recognition tools against the police by Jon_Lowtek on Friday October 23, 2020 @11:18PM (#24876676)
I don't see a big difference between the two in the matter of how the "reasonable expectations" of people are formed by technological realities. Sure there are minuscule formal differences, but on the grand scale going off-grid is like walking around in public with a ski-mask to avoid facial recognition.