News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Alaska Supreme Court takes aerial surveillance's thre... by dihydro on Monday June 03, 2024 @01:45PM (#40565204)
I think erring on the side of needing warrants for law enforcement can help with some of the incidental vs targeted surveillance debate. Law enforcement driving past while on regular patrol and noticing something vs spending time and resources to launch a drone, fly a plane, or stake out a property for surveillance has a distinction that feels neat enough for a court to rule on.

There are no comments on this comment yet.