Slashdot Mirror
Chuck Schumer Tells Apple and Google To "Curb Your Spy Planes"
mk1004 writes with news from The Register that U.S. Senator Charles Schumer of New York has written to Apple and Google regarding their use of 'military-grade spy planes.' The Senator claims concerns ranging from voyeurism to terrorism. Suggested protections: Warn when areas are going to be imaged, give property owners the right to opt out, and blurring of individuals. Schumer seems happy enough, though, with the more detailed versions of such surveillance being in the hands of law enforcement agencies, and phrases his complaint to emphasize what he perceives as risks to infrastructure brought about by detailed maps that anyone can browse: "[I]f highly detailed images become available, criminals could create more complete schematic maps of the power and water grids in the United States. With the vast amount of infrastructure across the country, it would be impossible to secure every location."
that "WTSHTF" is often referred to as "When the Schumer Hits the Fan".
So what is Chuck doing in his back yard that he doesn't want everyone to see, hmmm????
"Murderer? Well, that's a harsh word. I prefer to think of myself as a Mortality Technician."
Come on there must be better way... Perhaps by having a raid array of the appropriate infrastructure?
let's completely ignore the societal and economic benefits of such technology because ... fear, people. Fear.
Lynch the traitor
But if private companies want to spy, it's illegal. What a fucking hypocrisy we live in.
GPS used to have a 1km fudge factor inserted into it to prevent people using it for terrorist activities.
Not that I'm entirely sure how I feel about Google using drones to improve Google Earth. If I have a privacy fence up... well, it's to protect my privacy. Taking pictures from a low flying drone isn't much different than leaning a ladder against the fence and climbing up to peer over. On the other hand, it's a one time thing (or at least rare) and the same viewing angle can be achieved any number of ways that people don't have a problem with (if nothing else manned aircraft). I think I'm actually going to have to think about this one a bit...
Senator Schumer,
You seem to be arguing that drone usage by private companies violates the privacy and/or security of the American public. Many people agree with that. Additionally, many people agree that drone usage by Law Enforcement Agencies and US Federal Agencies also violates the privacy and/or security of the American public.
I find it hypocritical, then, that you would simultaneously support the use of armed drones in the US by Federal Agencies and Law Enforcement while objecting to unarmed drone use by private enterprise. Perhaps I'm not understanding your position clearly. Perhaps, and I believe this to be more likely, I am.
-----
Your lips are moving.
Nice grandstanding. Have you seen the Planet Earth series? I'd say that's probably better than "military grade" video. Actually, there's a lot of stuff out there better than military grade. Get over it.
Aside from being able to map out things from the comfort of your Abbottabad living room using a single source instead of doing regular old recon (it's not hard, or particularly obvious), there's no change except a perceptual one. He is correct that it is effectively impossible to secure every location. A better plan would be to build in the redundancy that should have been there in the first place. If my power goes out - way out in the country - for a week, it sucks to be me, but the 30,000 of us can manage. If power to the east coast goes out for a week, that's really, really bad. Perhaps you should consider a more robust system that is less prone to single point failures?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
tired of dumb congressmen grandstanding.
"[I]f highly detailed images become available... [then] it would be impossible to secure every location."
This is completely true, in the same sense that if I stand on my head right now, the sun will rise tomorrow. I'm glad to see Mr. Schumer is aware of both the impossibility of securing every location, and the basics of formal logic.
a federal law stating we have a general right of privacy.
Things to be included, but not limited to, would be...
A right to not have detailed arial imagery of one's private real property upon request. (You should be able to sunbath nude without worry that someone will post high-resolution images somewhere.) I say "upon request" because it seems infeasible to have it opt-in these days.
A right to remain anonymous until criminal conviction (the time between arrest and conviction, name and photo should remain private as not to potentially tarnish a person's good name).
A right to medical privacy. (Not sure how this would work, but I'm sure there are issues.)
Etc.
It precisely is building a schematic map of power grids...
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Now I know how Streisand felt.
First off his daughter the comic is kind of hot. ..now actually on topic I would demand that my area be removed from a paper map. What he is trying to say but failed miserably because he's both old and not knowing what he's talking about on a technical level is where is the cut-off line between information and privacy. If I go outside, I can see homes. If I look on a map, not really. If I look on Google Maps, I can see a birds eye view of things.
Also.. wasn't Microsoft Flight Sim to blame for 9/11 training or some junk like that? I mean really?
really? teatards is nice? what are you 7???
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
from yesterday.
Sieg Heil!
You do realize that Chuck Schumer is a Democrat, right? Definitely not a Tea Party guy.
Fail
sudo make me a sandwich
People have been using aerial photography to make maps for decades. There is absolutely nothing special (nor "military grade") about them.
this guy is an asshole
Yeah, only DHS can have spy planes!
maybe this time I'll get it!
Schumer doesn't give a rat's behind about privacy. What he cares about is calling attention to himself so that he can go on bullying the private sector from his imperial senate seat
If civilian companies have them.
Especially if those companies don't have any military ties.
This is the same reason my GPU isn't a military grade device.
What do the TeaTards say now?
He's a New York Democrat you dolt.
The hobbiest criminal who isn't so dedicated as to get of their arse and physically recon a target?
Dickhead! Get a job you bath-dodging chav!
Location is specifically not protected as Critical Energy Infrastructure Information (CEII).
This does not mean that location is necessarily public information to be provided by the government, but FERC specifically sought to keep the location of particular bits of infrastructure out of that data which is considered confidential.
If Schumer has a beef, he should bring it up with FERC.
"[I]f highly detailed images become available, criminals could create more complete schematic maps of the power and water grids in the United States. With the vast amount of infrastructure across the country, it would be impossible to secure every location."
Right...because today, every square inch of the undocumented US infrastructure is completely secure. /sarcasm
-> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
so the kinds of criminals that would know what to do with maps of infrastructure are too lazy or stupid or broke to get that information until google or apple provides it to them. would those maps make it easier for them? sure. just like a vehicle would help them getaway or a cell phone would help them communicate with each other, or a computer would help them plan a crime, or the weather channel would help them choose what day to commit a crime, etc.
insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
Whenever someone from the Republican party does something stupid, the article is instantly slapped with a "Republicans" tag. When a Democrat does something stupid... It's just one person being stupid.
Love sees no species.
Because the government hates competition when it comes to domestic spying.
I don't think it's possible to support privacy more than I do. But if you step foot outside of your living space, you have entered a public area. You may be seen by other people, your conversation can be overheard, and people are free to record your image and conversation via photographs, video recordings, or audio recordings. If you do not like this, you are free to refrain from leaving your living space or wear a disguise when you go out.
FTA: "...Google and Apple have upgraded their capabilities to aircraft-based photography that can see through windows and capture detailed images with four-inch resolution."
Four-inch resolution? I guess I don't have anything to worry about!
You post here all the time!
I am tired of sensationalizing politicians and the government using the fear of terrorism, or even perversion as an excuse to curtail freedom.
You first, Chucky!
Yet another mealy-mouthed, two-faced, lying, dinosaur of a career politician that should be swinging from the end of a rope instead of being in a position of government power.
A Google drone might spot a greenhouse in my backyard and target horticultural product ads at me. The horror!
A government drone might spot the same greenhouse and target a SWAT raid on me. Or a Hellfire missile.
If Chucky and his TLA buddies can fly a drone over me, I should be able to fly a drone over Chucky & friends.
Maybe an open-source drone project for civilians to counter the governments domestic drone spying with their own spy drones? I bet a few civilian drones buzzing over these politician's own homes and offices would get some attention.
And if the government decides to severely restrict civilian drone use while giving free reign to TLA/LEO drones, maybe my experience with designing military missile & torpedo guidance/targeting systems could find civilian counter-applications.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
I would say the same thing to Chuck:
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/drones-at-home-raise-1460393.html
Clearly we need to ban the printing of publicly available plat maps (hint, they predate computers by at least a century!),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plat
shut down GIS websites, and remove all info on everything from the Terrorist Intarwebs!
Plat maps show pipelines, power company and utility easements, and are absolutely fundamental to real estate transactions. Fuck, let's ban realtors too. The keep compromising "MLS listing books" the CommieIslamoNazis could use to kill our freedom.
Next time you see so-called "gun control" legislation pimped by Schumer, you'll have an insight into how his mind works!
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Those whacky people in Congress believe the funniest things.
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17qd3ow0n8c9qjpg/original.jpg
And when law enforcement does it makes it all good how? Just because someone is a conservative doesn't mean that they're doing it with an all or nothing mind set. But thanks for trying to divert attention from the real issue.
FAIL.
It doesn't work. It never works. If the only thing keeping the country safe is keeping secrets, then the country isn't safe.
Shades of Sean Gorman Batman! Anyone remember the uproar over his dissertation on critical infrastructure based on analysis of publicly available information. Almost 10 years ago.
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/buzz/us-critical-infrastructure/3633190
This stuff's been out for years, but it just wasn't freely available to the public -- you had to pay someone to get access to it. (oh ... and those groups sold to governments ... I know my county has access to pictometry.com ... I have no idea what all they use it for, but their website has suggestions)
Now that Google et.al. want to make it freely available, so the general public can use it, it's finally getting attention?
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
No democracy that is not a police state can protect every and each piece of public infrastructure.
Guess the Senator has less problems with the US becoming police state.
...are a threat to infrastructure too. As partisans prove (inexpensively, lest we forget) before the internet, someone who wants to fuck shit up and is willing to die trying can do considerable damage.
The way to sustain damage and keep fighting is to have enough redundant systems so you can take a hit or many. Trying to secure ALL your systems from ALL attacks is impractical and weakening.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Let's get rid of everything that Could Be Used For Terrorism... roads, telephones, power tools, cars, water... Fear it all!
Oh, should I have sugar-coated that?
Society is too stupid and undisciplined to govern itself. The rule of the majority always winds up with impossible directives like: keep taxes low but keep government-funded services abundant, track down criminals but don't invade our privacy, protect us from foreign threats but don't spend much on the military, give us abundant cheap energy but don't tap any natural resources, etc.
The larger the group of people, the more they want to have everything both ways, and the less they can agree on anything at all.
It is true that vesting power in a small group of people breeds corruption and tyrany, but it also gives rise to a necessary level of organizational effeciency that could not otherwise be achieved.
Google and Apple should respond with "We will if you will."
With the vast amount of infrastructure across the country, it would be impossible to secure every location.
It IS impossible to secure every location. Will American policy makers ever address the problem of WHY people want to attack the US? Will the US ever adopt a proactive approach to defense?
I'm fortunate to live in a country with virtually identical amenities and standard of living compared to the US, yet we don't inspire even a fraction of the fanatical hatred aimed at the US. Why is it, Americans, that people on the other side of the globe, who do not speak your language and have never been to your country, detest you with such fervour they would kill themselves to inflict harm on you?
I'm not justifying their position; I'm just saying it's a question that bears asking.
No kidding? It's impossible to protect every single piece of infrastructure in a country that is roughly 2.4B acres and has roughly 312M people is impossible to secure??
Interesting. You can't even secure the high value targets with your TSA security theater but you think you can stop useful information from being useful for the wrong people? You think you can actually stop anyone from taking pictures of bridges? Photograph is not a crime.
Why are we even giving this moron attention?
Seriously people, you keep voting for them! (Both senators and companies)
as long as I'm afforded the right to shoot them down
7 1/2 but whose counting?
Only Government can spy on citizens, hold you without trial, and bomb your house if they suspect you as a terrorist...or knock down your door and shoot your dogs for minor offenses. Didn't you know that? Chuck Schumer cares about your privacy and rights, unless he's violating them in which case it's the "proper role" of government.
As someone who works in aviation simulation, Google/Bing maps are my most used resource. I welcome higher resolution as it makes my job alot easier. That said, I do not think 4 inch imagery is needed and I hope that these companies work out some sort of equitable balance, including the installation of some sort of privacy filter, whether it's blurring out people or whatever is deemed necessary.
Infrastructure that is important enough to be a valuable target for terrorists can probably be found without these "detailed maps"
Wait, what? Rights are from social acceptance or convention, but aren't contingent? WTF? As for "natural law", the only "rights" natural law gives are physics. So what rights are you talking about that aren't contingent? The right to have mass?
All "rights" are established thru force, usually by a minority, but with the acquiescence of the majority. All rights (other than physical laws) are negotiable and contingent.
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
The federal government doesn't want any competition.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
He wrote them twice. First to criticize them. That letter was quickly followed by a demand for contributions to the DSCC.
They're all fucking clownshoes. Mouthbreathing idiots.
Schumer is about as far from a tea party member as you can get...
shut up you fucking nerd.
you're not funny by being the cynical sarcastic type
and as if it wasn't enough the first time you said it, you continued to repeat the gag.
i guess your signature says everything about your sense of humor. lame and predictable.
Schumer is about as far from a tea party member as you can get...
His paranoid ramblings would fit right in.
If the government terrorizes me, are they state sponsored terrorists?
Microsoft. Oh wait I meant to say Adobe. Um.. Symantec?
What do the TeaTards say now?
They want corporations to have more power than government, but they paranoid about privacy.
As long a CEO does it then it must be all good.
I've never looked at the group of tea partiers and thought their 'platform' was to give corporations more power. I thought their platform was to reduce government power. Those aren't opposite ends of the spectrum. Usually government regulation gives big companies the power to lobby and make rules in their favor.
You can sorta argue all kinds of different "motivations" for rights, I don't believe in most natural rights interpretation but a lot of people do. The OR is an exclusive OR here.
The thing that makes something a "right" is that, in the general case, it requires more force to prevent its exercise than the reward someone gets from preventing it, be that someone a government, or a corporation, or anyone else. You can't force people to stop talking, and the more successful you are, the more it has to rely on violence instead of authority or common cause and the less powerful the government becomes (I use Arendt's definitions of these terms).
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
He have something to hide... possibly his link to the Mossad and the Sayanim network.
If you never heard of Sayanim you should read it here:
http://criminalstate.com/tag/sayanim/
Twitter: @dainsanefh
When was the last time the United States government "put a gun to people's heads" to work an economic policy? A policy of any kind? Even if they throw you in jail they're not going to point a gun at you.
They will if that's what it takes to get you into the jail.
Every single law on the books comes down to "do this, or we will use whatever force necessary to make you wish you had when we asked nicely".
Break a law that only carries the punishment of a fine? Oh, that's not violent at all. Except if you don't pay that fine, then (possibly after additional fines first) you get a warrant out for your arrest. Some men with guns show up at your door and ask you to come sit in a concrete room for a while. If you don't, they will eventually try to physically drag you there, and if you manage to circumvent that, they will eventually pull out the mace, taser, or gun as necessary. If, on the very slim chance you manage to circumvent those measures, even more deadly force will be brought out until eventually you are either in that concrete room or dead.
It doesn't matter if the original crime was jaywalking. You do what they say (and you get a choice of options: don't jaywalk, or pay a fine now, or pay a bigger fine later, or hang out in a concrete room for a while now, or a longer while later, etc), or they will fucking kill you.
This is why it is very important to consider very carefully every time we want to make anything illegal: in the end, every law boils down to a threat of deadly force, and we have to ask what is really worth threatening someone's life over?
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
With high-resolution imagery? A group of college students already mapped North Korea's infrastructure using only existing satellite photos. http://www.nkeconwatch.com/north-korea-uncovered-google-earth/
How about we get detailed blueprints of Chucky Schumer's 27,000 square foot mansion?
Fuck New York Limousine Liberals who condescend to us from their ivory towers.
I have a concern about this, but can't address it because of the hypocrisy: Odd to have the government so deeply concerned about invasion of privacy when they have implimented numerous policies that greatly curtail it. Now if Chuck were interested in pointing fingers at both groups, we might have something...
So I sent a letter 2 nights ago to chuck, fox news, and a few others asking about these messed up contradictions. I have yet to receive a response... I simply asked how this works: Fox news (boo, ya, whatever), says you're raising the red flag on Google and Apple over more detailed maps, but here, http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/05/30/announces-plans-to-arm-domestic-surveillance-drones-missiles-139411/ you're advocating for 6 drone bases instead of the original 4, all because you hoped one of the bases would be in your own state. So are you trying to create jobs, and look good to your constituents, all in the name of spying on Americans, and then telling the nation that you're tough on privacy issues?
Better alternative:
Mr. Schumer, when did you stop fucking dogs to death?
Who is he???Hahaha!
womens sexy lingerie |
"[I]f highly detailed images become available, criminals could create more complete schematic maps of the power and water grids in the United States. With the vast amount of infrastructure across the country, it would be impossible to secure every location."
Has this person never used Google Earth? Heck, we've already had that from the days of Microsoft Terraserver years ago, with aerial photo images from the USGS. And before that you could buy an ordinary map.
OMG OMG criminals might use this! So tear up the roads, cut all the phone lines, and burn all the houses down so criminals can't use any of those either. Idiot.
Once again, that same burning question surfaces: How the f___ did Chuck Schumer ever get elected?
The guy has serious delusions of adequacy.
Maybe the dems should form a coffee party...