Government Spy Truck Is Disguised As A Google Street View Car (vice.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Matt Blaze, a University of Pennsylvania computer and information science professor, discovered a SUV "tucked away in the shadows of the Philadelphia Convention Center's tunnel" that was labeled as a Google Maps Street View car. It had two high-powered license plate reader cameras mounted on top, meaning it had to belong to a government agency. The Philadelphia Police Department had admitted it owns the truck after the report from Motherboard was published. "Unless the Philadelphia Fire Department of Streets Department are using automated license plate recognition (ALPR), this strongly suggests the city's police department is trawling city streets under the auspices of Google while snapping thousands of license plate images per minute," says Motherboard. ALPR can photograph thousands of license plate images per minute and track and store a person's travel habits without a warrant. Google spokesperson Susan Cadrecha commented on the report, "We can confirm this is not a Google Maps car, and that we are currently looking into the matter." The Philadelphia Police Department since responded to the report: "We have been informed that this unmarked vehicle belongs to the police department; however, the placement of any particular decal on the vehicle was not approved through any chain of command. With that being said, once this was brought to our attention, it was ordered that the decals be removed immediately."

Comments

What's the difference?

[jafiwam]

Really, what's the difference?

I am sure disguising it as something else would be easy enough.

Someone has a sense of humor.

Re:What's the difference?

[ka9dgx]

The difference is that doing this would put Google maps drivers in danger.

Just like when the CIA sent spies disguised as vaccine workers, and set back the effort to eliminae smallpox worldwide.

Re:What's the difference?

[ShaunC]

It seriously calls into question the legitimacy of their surveillance. Phrased another way: if the police aren't doing anything wrong, why are they trying to hide it?

Re:What's the difference?

[ka9dgx]

What's wrong with police cars being marked as police cars? Why put Google drivers at risk for no good reason?

Re:What's the difference?

[Khyber]

Internal espionage is just as bad, if not worse, than international espionage.

Spying is spying is spying.

If you need to hide your activities, YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG 99% OF THE TIME.

Re:What's the difference?

[dave420]

Do you really need this spelled out to you? If the police masquerade as Google cars, people will perceive Google cars as possibly police cars, something entirely unreasonable without the actions of the police. That means anyone with a grudge against the police, be it premeditated or in the heat of passion, will now have reason to assume any marked Google vehicles are actually cop cars. The comparison with the CIA's operation was to illustrate to you that by masquerading as another entity blurs the lines of perception between the two. If one actor is subsequently discovered to be acting in poor faith, then the other, possibly innocent actor is tainted.

This is not difficult to understand. Sure, it shows you are wrong, but it's not difficult to understand.

Re:What's the difference?

[Holi]

Are you so weak willed that others must be silenced so they don't tell you how to think?

Re:What's the difference?

[DakotaSmith]

I can explain why it puts them at risk.

Over the last half-century of my life, the United States has become a police state. Our local police officers routinely over-step their authority (to put it mildly). This should hardly be news to anyone with a pair of eyes. If you know how to find the thousands of police abuse videos on YouTube, three can be no denying it.

We live in a police state. Consequently, there has been a very rational backlash against police in the last few years. You can see this in particular with the "Black Lives Matter" movement (though their choice of poster children leaves something to be desired, most of the time).

In any case, you can think of it this way:

When I was a young man, if you were getting hassled by the cops, there was some good chance you'd been involved in at least a misdemeanor if not a felony. Today, if you're getting hassled by the cops, it's probably over the city's taxation program.

What cities, counties, and States have done is to turn the cops into tax collectors.

This was not always the case.

When I was a young man, a cop was unlikely to cite you for a traffic violation unless they observed you driving recklessly. The fines for minor speeding, failure to signal, etc, were all very small. I was involved in a three-car accident that was my fault. I was cited for failure to yield right-of-way and had to pay some small amount (the real punishment came in the form of increased insurance premiums).

Today's fines for minor traffic violations now run into the hundreds of dollars, even for the least offense. This is simply taxation by another name.

And the police -- with their citation quotas -- are the tax collectors.

Tell me, do you not cringe if you see a flashing light in the rear-view? Do you not immediately look around, hoping you didn't do anything minor -- because the fine would be exorbitant beyond any reason?

It wasn't always like this. I know it's hard to believe, but before cops became tax collectors, people actually trusted them.

As tax collectors, they are a bane on our existence. This coupled with abuses that are now being captured by anyone with an HD video recorder in their pocket has revealed a truly disgusting side of the police. They're not just a bane on our existence, in some cases, they are actively our enemy,

So bringing all this back:

People hate cops, at least as much as they would hate any tax-collector. Sometimes more.

Disguising your cop car as a private business' car risks detection -- as in this case.

When detected, the natural assumption is that this is neither the first nor last time such deception has been undertaken.

From this point forward, it is perfectly rational to suspect a Google Street View car is, in fact, a police car.

The occupants of that then receive the same hatred as police officers.

This puts the Google Street View car occupants in danger.

If they don't stop tax-collecting, one of these days there will be a significant backlash against police. As tax-collectors, they deserve it,

There's no reason to get some poor Google Street View driver tarred, feathered, and run out of town (the traditional method of dealing with tax-collectors).

Another case of bullshit government overreach

[surfdaddy]

You know, the issue is that what has happened since Osama Bin Laden created the 9/11 disaster is that the U.S. has been creeping toward a surveillance state, but it has been slow enough that it's like hair growing. You have short hair, and you still have short hair, and a few weeks later you still have fairly short hair, and then a few months later you finally realize that you have long hair. But it happened so slowly that nobody is very alarmed. We have Clapper lying to Congress, we have Comey saying the government needs to get into terrorist encrypted phones, and we have Feinstein putting (essentially) backdoor encryption legislation out for comment. Meanwhile, police departments are going wild with Stingrays and cameras. Welcome to Big Brother and the surveillance state. "Land of the Free" and the home of the spied upon...

Ah

[DaMattster]

The Orwellian Society draws ever near.

Not Approved

[Luthair]

So some lowly peon opened their wallet and paid out of pocket for printing the Google vinyls? Bullshit.

Re:Not Approved

[xlsior]

So some lowly peon opened their wallet and paid out of pocket for printing the Google vinyls? Bullshit.

Cities and counties typically have equipment at their own public works department which can print plastic decals for things like street name signs, speed signs, traffic signs, etc. It wouldn't take much to print some custom decals on the same machines. Just because it got printed doesn't necessarily mean that the powers that be signed off on it.

Also

[SeattleLawGuy]

The difference is that doing this would put Google maps drivers in danger.

Just like when the CIA sent spies disguised as vaccine workers, and set back the effort to eliminae smallpox worldwide.

It is also use of Google's Trademarks as part of a government surveillance program--this reinforces the notion that Google itself and the American tech sector in general is not only replying to subpoenas, but is actually complicit in warrantless mass surveillance. It is harmful to Google's business reputation.

If you have nothing to hide..

[twmcneil]

So if what this vehicle was doing was so above reproach, why disguise it's purpose? Oh, you mean, you have a reason to hide behind a facade, a LIE? Good going assholes.

Really, can't tell the cops from the criminals these days.

Context

[dbIII]

Or do you consider every fancy dress party as the equivalent of international espionage?

If police or spooks are using it as a cover for an operation the answer is obvious. Please try to keep track of context and please try to be less ridiculous. I come here for information not pointless mass debating.

"Sorry we got caught."

[Pezbian]

"It won't happen again; we promise*."

* We'll still do it, we'll just be more stealthy.

The decals removed

[pablo_max]

thank goodness...since you know..the decals is what everyone is concerned about. Not the mass tracking of the population without any cause.