no stalking involved, a stationary camera (plus stationary cameras from any one else contributing) plotting plate data on google maps. I can see how politicians would change the meaning of stalking to include something like this however.
based on the SC and the EFF, it seems as if i would be well within my rights to set up some cameras to OCR plates myself than correct? I could even crowd source it, and post little trackers on particular cars when they pass the citizen cameras showing the routes and routines of anyone I want as well? Cops, federal employees, if i got down to chappaqua and set some up i could even monitor the clintons, all legally correct?? Hey if thats how they want it than i got to start writing a new android/iphone app
Im not against reasonable retention laws, 30-60 days is well within reason for the numbers not being watched on some list, any longer is too much (I feel the same way about internet logs and phone records, 30-60 days without a court order and it should be purged)
illegal search and seizure. I have the right to move freely about in my country, without worrying about the government trying to stop me. By keeping a record of everywhere i go via my plate, (without me committing a crime) they are illegally collecting and retaining my information about my travels. Taking the photo is fine, keeping it IMO is not (and if it is, than we should be just as well within our rights to document all movements of the police in public, im talking a google map with a tracker on it showing where every last one is at any given time (or at least the last time it was "tagged" by a scanner)
Im no lawyer, but my main argument here is what right does the government have in collecting any and all data on us all? My beliefs are that if i am not a criminal, the government has 0 right to collect anything on me, and if they do accidentally, it should be destroyed, not stored away for someone to pull up and use against me for some unrelated thing that might happen down the road.
how so? their argument is that the data is public because its out in public, if they drive by my home, they are in public, as such I am able to take that data and do what I want with it. Use their reasoning against them
you know this doesnt sound as crazy as it did the first time i read through it. I mean the truth is that we have to play the game, not just bend over and take it. if a bunch of people in this town set up a camera by their home, and with a little script had it pull the cop car data we could get a real time network of where all cops are.
we could take the rest of the plate data and sell it to google, who im sure would love access to that and make some money (which we will need due to the increased police harassment you know follows anytime someone stands up to authority)
I
guess the point is to watch the watchers until they stop invading our rights.
very simply I want them to write in a way so that it checks if the car matches the hit list, if yes, marks it, if not, discards it. there should be NO retention of a plate if its not on the "hit list"
take your head outa your ass for a few minutes, not everything is republican and democrat here. This has NOTHING To do with politics. we are all dumber for having listened to you, I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul
California is the only state in the country where lane-splitting is legal.
"Basically, what we're most interested in is the speeds," Pope said. "You should lane-split no faster than 10 mph over the speed of traffic around you, and we recommend (motorcyclists) not split at all if the traffic is faster than 30 mph."
That would be good, but just make sure you remember to stop weaving in and out of traffic with no blinker, or drive between cars in their lanes because they are going to slow for you.
I know this sounds like a knock at bike riders but its not, i ride myself, but far to many bikers (more often than not on crotch rockets) tend to ignore traffic laws just as much
lets the losers fail and the winners win, than emulate the winners, not make the winners lower the standard so that others can "look" to be just as good.
i would have less of a problem with it, (less, not none) if there were not strings attached. For example, if you want that 4 billion dollars from the fed? you better be doing X, and not Y and if you do Y (even if Y makes sense where you live vs X making sense somewhere else) you dont get the money
the feds do this thing all the time, remember when drinking age was 18? the feds said they would hold up federal funding to states that did not raise it to 21. what happens? all states raise the drinking age to 21. is that right to you??? its not to me
you were right at first, NY should NOT be paying for roads in cali (except for interstate highways, which are federal concerns) but when you brought up the army, the constitution says that is the federal governments concern.
you seem to be confused on how this "nation" works. this "nation" is a group of many many smaller nations under one roof. we are unique in the regard. no, the people in washington should not be setting the funding for schools all around the country simple as that.
i get what you are getting at, but i dont believe that money should be taken away from those who do right to put their kids through a good school, and transferred to schools in other locations. I dont know what the answer is, but money should be kept local, or state wide at worst.
most of thethey do is disburse funds from the fed to the states
and this is the exact problem I have with the dept of ed. People in ny shouldnt be paying for students in cali, and people in north dakota should not be paying for students in fla. Keep the money local, and get rid of the overhead. Not to mention the fed can play games with the states, making requirements to receive funding that have nothing to do with education. Its wrong
i actually graduated with honors thank you very much. Smoking pot has nothing to do with how smart someone is. Many of the brightest people use marijuana, they dont advertize it though
just because the dept of ed has utterly failed any of us who went through school in the past 40 years, doesnt mean the right thing to do is go back and not teach you know, the basics. The dept of ed is horrible, but people like this dont belong setting the curriculum either
ok, fair enough. i simplified my position too much when i said the model was wrong. My point i do believe remains however. my point was simply that there are variables that we are not aware of which could change the direction needed.
for example, lets say we find out that we are right, and we are to blame. but what if the planet has natural ways to rectify the situation that we do not understand? what if the planet is already doing "something" to fix the problem and we dont know it? what happens when we try and "fix" the problem and in turn make things worse? (which generally tends to happen with humans)
My point with the post was for both pro AGW and anti AGW people to look back and see that they are SO focused on one data set (man) that they are not paying attention to other sets of data
thats actually not what i was saying at all. where did i say do nothing? what I am saying is that the "models" are wrong, because they dont have all the variables in place, as such we can take them with a grain of salt AND AT THE SAME TIME... work on ways to reduce our contribution to the "problem"
Slashdot Mirror
no stalking involved, a stationary camera (plus stationary cameras from any one else contributing) plotting plate data on google maps. I can see how politicians would change the meaning of stalking to include something like this however.
based on the SC and the EFF, it seems as if i would be well within my rights to set up some cameras to OCR plates myself than correct? I could even crowd source it, and post little trackers on particular cars when they pass the citizen cameras showing the routes and routines of anyone I want as well? Cops, federal employees, if i got down to chappaqua and set some up i could even monitor the clintons, all legally correct?? Hey if thats how they want it than i got to start writing a new android/iphone app
Im not against reasonable retention laws, 30-60 days is well within reason for the numbers not being watched on some list, any longer is too much (I feel the same way about internet logs and phone records, 30-60 days without a court order and it should be purged)
illegal search and seizure. I have the right to move freely about in my country, without worrying about the government trying to stop me. By keeping a record of everywhere i go via my plate, (without me committing a crime) they are illegally collecting and retaining my information about my travels. Taking the photo is fine, keeping it IMO is not (and if it is, than we should be just as well within our rights to document all movements of the police in public, im talking a google map with a tracker on it showing where every last one is at any given time (or at least the last time it was "tagged" by a scanner)
Im no lawyer, but my main argument here is what right does the government have in collecting any and all data on us all? My beliefs are that if i am not a criminal, the government has 0 right to collect anything on me, and if they do accidentally, it should be destroyed, not stored away for someone to pull up and use against me for some unrelated thing that might happen down the road.
id rather let criminals walk, over infringing on innocent americans constitutional rightd
marked? im looking at all plate data, Im hoping to locate the unmarked!
how so? their argument is that the data is public because its out in public, if they drive by my home, they are in public, as such I am able to take that data and do what I want with it. Use their reasoning against them
you know this doesnt sound as crazy as it did the first time i read through it. I mean the truth is that we have to play the game, not just bend over and take it. if a bunch of people in this town set up a camera by their home, and with a little script had it pull the cop car data we could get a real time network of where all cops are.
we could take the rest of the plate data and sell it to google, who im sure would love access to that and make some money (which we will need due to the increased police harassment you know follows anytime someone stands up to authority)
I guess the point is to watch the watchers until they stop invading our rights.
very simply I want them to write in a way so that it checks if the car matches the hit list, if yes, marks it, if not, discards it. there should be NO retention of a plate if its not on the "hit list"
take your head outa your ass for a few minutes, not everything is republican and democrat here. This has NOTHING To do with politics. we are all dumber for having listened to you, I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul
his account tweets, do you really think its him and not a PR firm?
California is the only state in the country where lane-splitting is legal.
"Basically, what we're most interested in is the speeds," Pope said. "You should lane-split no faster than 10 mph over the speed of traffic around you, and we recommend (motorcyclists) not split at all if the traffic is faster than 30 mph."
That would be good, but just make sure you remember to stop weaving in and out of traffic with no blinker, or drive between cars in their lanes because they are going to slow for you.
I know this sounds like a knock at bike riders but its not, i ride myself, but far to many bikers (more often than not on crotch rockets) tend to ignore traffic laws just as much
followed shortly by cops(and hackers) having the ability to shut down any car it chooses? no thanks
in other words, what we are doing doesnt work, lets do something else
lets the losers fail and the winners win, than emulate the winners, not make the winners lower the standard so that others can "look" to be just as good.
i would have less of a problem with it, (less, not none) if there were not strings attached. For example, if you want that 4 billion dollars from the fed? you better be doing X, and not Y and if you do Y (even if Y makes sense where you live vs X making sense somewhere else) you dont get the money
the feds do this thing all the time, remember when drinking age was 18? the feds said they would hold up federal funding to states that did not raise it to 21. what happens? all states raise the drinking age to 21. is that right to you??? its not to me
you were right at first, NY should NOT be paying for roads in cali (except for interstate highways, which are federal concerns) but when you brought up the army, the constitution says that is the federal governments concern.
you seem to be confused on how this "nation" works. this "nation" is a group of many many smaller nations under one roof. we are unique in the regard. no, the people in washington should not be setting the funding for schools all around the country simple as that.
i get what you are getting at, but i dont believe that money should be taken away from those who do right to put their kids through a good school, and transferred to schools in other locations. I dont know what the answer is, but money should be kept local, or state wide at worst.
threw up a straw man yeah. My point was simply being a pothead has nothing do with with the point being made (by myself as well I suppose)
most of thethey do is disburse funds from the fed to the states
and this is the exact problem I have with the dept of ed. People in ny shouldnt be paying for students in cali, and people in north dakota should not be paying for students in fla. Keep the money local, and get rid of the overhead. Not to mention the fed can play games with the states, making requirements to receive funding that have nothing to do with education. Its wrong
which is exactly what I did by blaming the dept of ed,
i actually graduated with honors thank you very much. Smoking pot has nothing to do with how smart someone is. Many of the brightest people use marijuana, they dont advertize it though
just because the dept of ed has utterly failed any of us who went through school in the past 40 years, doesnt mean the right thing to do is go back and not teach you know, the basics. The dept of ed is horrible, but people like this dont belong setting the curriculum either
ok, fair enough. i simplified my position too much when i said the model was wrong. My point i do believe remains however. my point was simply that there are variables that we are not aware of which could change the direction needed.
for example, lets say we find out that we are right, and we are to blame. but what if the planet has natural ways to rectify the situation that we do not understand? what if the planet is already doing "something" to fix the problem and we dont know it? what happens when we try and "fix" the problem and in turn make things worse? (which generally tends to happen with humans)
also another great possible situation
My point with the post was for both pro AGW and anti AGW people to look back and see that they are SO focused on one data set (man) that they are not paying attention to other sets of data
thats actually not what i was saying at all. where did i say do nothing? what I am saying is that the "models" are wrong, because they dont have all the variables in place, as such we can take them with a grain of salt AND AT THE SAME TIME... work on ways to reduce our contribution to the "problem"