It appears that regardless of which court, the operating instructions for the US of A are being ignored. I have a hard time believing the courts are directly on the side of those who thirst for power and control, but it is hard to tell from their behavior that they don't have some empathy for them.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 29 Mar 2019 @ 6:08pm
It's gonna get ugly
"They just can't keep it buried in the back of the closet anymore."
That assumes they don't destroy 'it' (aka them) 'accidentally' first. I wonder how many accidents can be imagined...um...how many law enforcement agencies exist in California? That might answer that question. What is the penalty for the destruction of required records? Right...taxpayers pay the fines and the perpetrators get off scott-free.
Then if records actually make it into the public purview they will be used to:
1: Denigrate, though properly, officers testimony in court
2: Generate lawsuits against departments and individual officers where there now exists evidence that was not available in the past. If the departments lose, the taxpayers get dinged again. If the officer looses, some justice might occur, but they don't have any kind of what is considered deep pockets, and might just quit and go work for a different force. That might not absolve them of any judgement, but it might make it more difficult to collect.
3: Make law enforcement agencies much more careful about what they write down at all times. We know that they are required to record certain things (which might vary department to department, but state record keeping laws apply to all) so if it isn't in writing, then it isn't. Then someone might accuse someone of misconduct in the future and the department will look and legitimately say 'we have no record of that' because they just discussed it and never wrote it down. Oh, and those video recordings from individual officers and dash cams? There will be massive, and ongoing, and un-correctable issues with their various retention and backup schemes.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 29 Mar 2019 @ 11:42am
What to advertise and to whom
The thing that has always gotten me about targeted advertising is how they think they know what I am about to buy, or am interested in buying. I might do a search for something that I am interested in, but have no intention of buying. I might research a field that has nothing to do with any possibility of any future purchases. They might conclude that I am looking up information about...say clouds, that I am not going to try to buy a cloud, but instead assume I want a weather station. I don't.
So with all the data they dig up on someone, there is still some set of assumptions being made that don't necessarily correlate to someones buying behavior. Even trying to use machine learning or artificial intelligence to overcome the deficiencies of those assumptions by better targeting the differences between what they thought I would buy and what I did buy isn't going to help them predict the future of what I might be interested in buying, simply because tastes and interests change. Then I might have bought it off line and they have no idea about that purchase. I don't use store cards and tend to spend cash.
Then there are economic factors as well. Today I might be able to afford an economy car, while dreaming about some super car. In the future, though, I might be able to afford something in between. So what do they target me with, and how do they justify their efforts when I actually go an buy a used car?
The advertising buying businesses might be better off bolstering their brand names broadly, rather than advertising products to individuals. Perhaps if Mr. Wanamaker went about telling the world how and why his store was different and better than his top five competitors, he might have seen a different value perspective from his advertising dollar, as apposed to advertising certain products on sale. Maybe he did just that, but still felt his advertising program lacked the punch he desired.
That leaves us with advertisers having to understand that even when their ads are seen, they may not have the desired impact for a variety of reasons, and accept that trying to target individuals might be just as wasteful. Then, add in the feeling that targeted individuals get when they realize that someone has been poking around in their lives, and use their disgust to go a different direction.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 8:11pm
Re: Can the citizens of LA do the same to the cops?
Probably not, but the embarrassment coming from the disclosures of bad behavior by law enforcement officers that are eminent (that is if they are not destroyed first, but that is an entirely different legal matter that if it becomes truet I predict will go nowhere after years of huffing and puffing) might be enough to do some damage to some officers for past behavior. Of course they should have had that damage when those events occurred.
Part of the problem is that the cops are on the prosecutors/judges side, and they don't like to have penalties thrown against them. Then there is the ability of the officers to amend their statements, over and over, until they get it 'right' because they don't follow the same rules as us peons. Then there is the statute of limitations, whereby some, if not many offences that were not prosecuted, or not prosecuted properly will go without any detrimental effect to the perpetrators who have had significant vacation time (erm paid administrative leave) and their legal bill paid by their union.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 6:45pm
Re: Taking All The Mon[ey]
Lawsuits are like some poker games. Keep raising until everyone has all their money on the table, then grab the money and pull a gun on the rest of the players, then walk away.
The difference is whether you have enough money to stay in the game till some bastard pulls the gun, or you get lucky and the game is interrupted by the court, after a really huge anti, and then whether you get that anti back is yet another gamble.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 5:55pm
The lack of understanding of the criminal mind, or any mind
Does this tell us that humans don't do any better at 'pre-crime' analysis than algorithms will? Humans write algorithms, don't they?
Predicting crime might be possible, someday, but taking action on those 'predictions' should take a lot longer. We might be at the beginning of understanding the criminal mind, but predicting what their next action might be is something else. Then there is the difference between the long term, repeat offender, and the new, not yet known offender in the making. Predict them!
I have yet, after years of interaction, found anyone who could tell me what I am thinking or what I am about to do. Part of that is I don't always know what I am about to do (I like surprises) and part is that no one is absolutely knowable. Criminal or not.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 5:07pm
Re:
Did you read the part where this is an ongoing investigation, and consider that law enforcement officers are generally reluctant to provide information about ongoing investigations? There will be more information in the future, and whether or not there was a quid pro quo for anything may or may not come to lite.
Still, $600K is nothing to sneeze at, and it had a purpose. Whether we actually know that purpose in the future will depend upon a lot of things, and justice has little to do with any of that. Politics does, however, and it is insidious, and under the table as well as above board. It get sticky when those two are mixed and mingled. What we will know in the end will be a bland reflection of reality, and yet another shame place on our system of governance. Something like the Meuller report (which we might never see) and the synopsis of, which is probably heavily edited and parsed.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 1:59pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 230 maximalists will be the death of 230
If AirBnB has a line in it's TOS that renters have to affirm that they are in compliance with all local laws (I don't know if they do or don't, but I cannot imagine their lawyers allowing them to operate without such a statement), why should they be held accountable for the renter lying?
Why would AirBnB know that any of their users were breaking local laws without doing some serious investigations into each and every one of them, because the slippery slope you are greasing up would hold any service provider liable for any law broken by any of it's users.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 1:38pm
Re: Not just the EU
"I'm a glass half-empty person but I think non-EU users should be worried about this."
I am sure they are, however, from the outside the issues are different than from the inside. The idea that sovereignty's can enforce their rules anywhere that is not their sovereignty is something that will come under greater and greater scrutiny as more and more bully's try to impose their will.
Unfortunately there will be some deep hurt to those that become the test cases, in the beginning. Also, unfortunately there will be no holding those bully's accountable for their misbehavior prior to being told in no uncertain terms that they don't have standing to enforce rules outside their jurisdiction.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 8:32am
Re: So..
Interesting. Where does the line get drawn? What is news? Does it include private activities of celebrities, other public figures, other private figures? Where does privacy come in the course of journalism? Is everything anyone does fare for public fodder? Or should journalists be schooled in the difference between privacy and that which is appropriate for public consumption. Public officials should be scrutinized, they put themselves in the spotlight. Celebrities are another matter, though they also put themselves in the spotlight. Others however...
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 7:59am
Re: Re: Sub Rosa Reasons
They have already done what? Define who is or isn't a journalists? What law was that? My search may have been inadequate but I only came up with discussion about shield laws, which are by the states, not the feds, and those do not identify the 'nature' of journalist.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 28 Mar 2019 @ 7:38am
Almost there
"On March 12, Utah legislators voted unanimously to pass landmark legislation in support of a new privacy law that will protect private electronic data stored with third parties like Google or Facebook from free-range government access. The bill stipulates that law enforcement will be required to obtain a warrant before accessing “certain electronic information or data.”"
I sure hope the Utah legislators realize that the NSA, CIA, DIA, and others are not 'law enforcement agencies' and expand the definition to all government agencies in the actual final legislation. I also hope that they specifically include phone companies, electric companies, other utilities, email providers (even if they don't have a 'presence' in their state), and cell phones, personal computers and tablets, thumb drives, portable hard drives, cloud accounts, and/or any other data retention method that exists, or will exist in the future. Then, when they get it right, the language could be presented to Congress, where this should be happening.
On the post: 7th Circuit Punts On Border Smartphone Searches; Says Riley Decision Doesn't Affect Anything
Damned the Constitution, full search ahead
It appears that regardless of which court, the operating instructions for the US of A are being ignored. I have a hard time believing the courts are directly on the side of those who thirst for power and control, but it is hard to tell from their behavior that they don't have some empathy for them.
On the post: Police Misconduct Records Show California Police Officer Busting Sober Drivers For DUI
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Housing stipend"?
Or from Chihuahua's that escaped their fence in yard to play with the dog across the street.
On the post: Police Misconduct Records Show California Police Officer Busting Sober Drivers For DUI
It's gonna get ugly
That assumes they don't destroy 'it' (aka them) 'accidentally' first. I wonder how many accidents can be imagined...um...how many law enforcement agencies exist in California? That might answer that question. What is the penalty for the destruction of required records? Right...taxpayers pay the fines and the perpetrators get off scott-free.
Then if records actually make it into the public purview they will be used to:
1: Denigrate, though properly, officers testimony in court
2: Generate lawsuits against departments and individual officers where there now exists evidence that was not available in the past. If the departments lose, the taxpayers get dinged again. If the officer looses, some justice might occur, but they don't have any kind of what is considered deep pockets, and might just quit and go work for a different force. That might not absolve them of any judgement, but it might make it more difficult to collect.
3: Make law enforcement agencies much more careful about what they write down at all times. We know that they are required to record certain things (which might vary department to department, but state record keeping laws apply to all) so if it isn't in writing, then it isn't. Then someone might accuse someone of misconduct in the future and the department will look and legitimately say 'we have no record of that' because they just discussed it and never wrote it down. Oh, and those video recordings from individual officers and dash cams? There will be massive, and ongoing, and un-correctable issues with their various retention and backup schemes.
4: ETC.
On the post: What If Google And Facebook Admitted That All This Ad Targeting Really Doesn't Work That Well?
What to advertise and to whom
The thing that has always gotten me about targeted advertising is how they think they know what I am about to buy, or am interested in buying. I might do a search for something that I am interested in, but have no intention of buying. I might research a field that has nothing to do with any possibility of any future purchases. They might conclude that I am looking up information about...say clouds, that I am not going to try to buy a cloud, but instead assume I want a weather station. I don't.
So with all the data they dig up on someone, there is still some set of assumptions being made that don't necessarily correlate to someones buying behavior. Even trying to use machine learning or artificial intelligence to overcome the deficiencies of those assumptions by better targeting the differences between what they thought I would buy and what I did buy isn't going to help them predict the future of what I might be interested in buying, simply because tastes and interests change. Then I might have bought it off line and they have no idea about that purchase. I don't use store cards and tend to spend cash.
Then there are economic factors as well. Today I might be able to afford an economy car, while dreaming about some super car. In the future, though, I might be able to afford something in between. So what do they target me with, and how do they justify their efforts when I actually go an buy a used car?
The advertising buying businesses might be better off bolstering their brand names broadly, rather than advertising products to individuals. Perhaps if Mr. Wanamaker went about telling the world how and why his store was different and better than his top five competitors, he might have seen a different value perspective from his advertising dollar, as apposed to advertising certain products on sale. Maybe he did just that, but still felt his advertising program lacked the punch he desired.
That leaves us with advertisers having to understand that even when their ads are seen, they may not have the desired impact for a variety of reasons, and accept that trying to target individuals might be just as wasteful. Then, add in the feeling that targeted individuals get when they realize that someone has been poking around in their lives, and use their disgust to go a different direction.
On the post: Salesforce Sued For Sex Trafficking... Because Backpage Used Salesforce's CRM
Re: Re: Re: Taking All The Mon[ey]
Hmm, so it is, thanks.
On the post: LAPD Watchdog Says Department's Data-Based Policing Is Producing Nothing But Wasted Time And Rights Violations
Re: Can the citizens of LA do the same to the cops?
Probably not, but the embarrassment coming from the disclosures of bad behavior by law enforcement officers that are eminent (that is if they are not destroyed first, but that is an entirely different legal matter that if it becomes truet I predict will go nowhere after years of huffing and puffing) might be enough to do some damage to some officers for past behavior. Of course they should have had that damage when those events occurred.
Part of the problem is that the cops are on the prosecutors/judges side, and they don't like to have penalties thrown against them. Then there is the ability of the officers to amend their statements, over and over, until they get it 'right' because they don't follow the same rules as us peons. Then there is the statute of limitations, whereby some, if not many offences that were not prosecuted, or not prosecuted properly will go without any detrimental effect to the perpetrators who have had significant vacation time (erm paid administrative leave) and their legal bill paid by their union.
On the post: 9th Circuit's Bad AirBnB Decision Threatens Basic Internet Business Models
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 230 maximalists will be the death of 230
So, prosecute the hammer and let the hammer operator go free? The hammer did it on its own?
You ability at analogy is seriously warped, and not in a good way.
On the post: Salesforce Sued For Sex Trafficking... Because Backpage Used Salesforce's CRM
Re: Taking All The Mon[ey]
Lawsuits are like some poker games. Keep raising until everyone has all their money on the table, then grab the money and pull a gun on the rest of the players, then walk away.
The difference is whether you have enough money to stay in the game till some bastard pulls the gun, or you get lucky and the game is interrupted by the court, after a really huge anti, and then whether you get that anti back is yet another gamble.
On the post: Australian Prosecutors Trying To Throw Reporters In Jail For Accurately Reporting On Cardinal George Pell's Conviction
Parallel Constructions
Why does this story make me think about how the Catholic Church tried to make me responsible for original sin? I didn't buy that one either.
On the post: Salesforce Sued For Sex Trafficking... Because Backpage Used Salesforce's CRM
Re: Re: Recursive Intermediate Liability
Tell him to bring all six of his extended connections with him. Make sure each is properly deposed.
On the post: LAPD Watchdog Says Department's Data-Based Policing Is Producing Nothing But Wasted Time And Rights Violations
The lack of understanding of the criminal mind, or any mind
Does this tell us that humans don't do any better at 'pre-crime' analysis than algorithms will? Humans write algorithms, don't they?
Predicting crime might be possible, someday, but taking action on those 'predictions' should take a lot longer. We might be at the beginning of understanding the criminal mind, but predicting what their next action might be is something else. Then there is the difference between the long term, repeat offender, and the new, not yet known offender in the making. Predict them!
I have yet, after years of interaction, found anyone who could tell me what I am thinking or what I am about to do. Part of that is I don't always know what I am about to do (I like surprises) and part is that no one is absolutely knowable. Criminal or not.
On the post: 9th Circuit's Bad AirBnB Decision Threatens Basic Internet Business Models
Re:
Not really
On the post: Cohen Payment Kerfuffle Forces AT&T To Be Slightly More Transparent About Lobbying
Re:
Did you read the part where this is an ongoing investigation, and consider that law enforcement officers are generally reluctant to provide information about ongoing investigations? There will be more information in the future, and whether or not there was a quid pro quo for anything may or may not come to lite.
Still, $600K is nothing to sneeze at, and it had a purpose. Whether we actually know that purpose in the future will depend upon a lot of things, and justice has little to do with any of that. Politics does, however, and it is insidious, and under the table as well as above board. It get sticky when those two are mixed and mingled. What we will know in the end will be a bland reflection of reality, and yet another shame place on our system of governance. Something like the Meuller report (which we might never see) and the synopsis of, which is probably heavily edited and parsed.
On the post: 9th Circuit's Bad AirBnB Decision Threatens Basic Internet Business Models
Re: Re:
Does "white supremacist trash and the exploitation videos" actually monetize their IP on YouTube? Or are they just there?
On the post: 9th Circuit's Bad AirBnB Decision Threatens Basic Internet Business Models
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 230 maximalists will be the death of 230
If AirBnB has a line in it's TOS that renters have to affirm that they are in compliance with all local laws (I don't know if they do or don't, but I cannot imagine their lawyers allowing them to operate without such a statement), why should they be held accountable for the renter lying?
Why would AirBnB know that any of their users were breaking local laws without doing some serious investigations into each and every one of them, because the slippery slope you are greasing up would hold any service provider liable for any law broken by any of it's users.
On the post: After Insisting That EU Copyright Directive Didn't Require Filters, France Immediately Starts Promoting Filters
Re: Not just the EU
I am sure they are, however, from the outside the issues are different than from the inside. The idea that sovereignty's can enforce their rules anywhere that is not their sovereignty is something that will come under greater and greater scrutiny as more and more bully's try to impose their will.
Unfortunately there will be some deep hurt to those that become the test cases, in the beginning. Also, unfortunately there will be no holding those bully's accountable for their misbehavior prior to being told in no uncertain terms that they don't have standing to enforce rules outside their jurisdiction.
On the post: After Insisting That EU Copyright Directive Didn't Require Filters, France Immediately Starts Promoting Filters
When choosing filters
i recommend charcoal activated and/or hepa filters. They should work to remove all the nasty bits...right?
On the post: Stupid Law Making Assaulting Journalists A Federal Crime Revived By Congress
Re: So..
Interesting. Where does the line get drawn? What is news? Does it include private activities of celebrities, other public figures, other private figures? Where does privacy come in the course of journalism? Is everything anyone does fare for public fodder? Or should journalists be schooled in the difference between privacy and that which is appropriate for public consumption. Public officials should be scrutinized, they put themselves in the spotlight. Celebrities are another matter, though they also put themselves in the spotlight. Others however...
On the post: Stupid Law Making Assaulting Journalists A Federal Crime Revived By Congress
Re: Re: Sub Rosa Reasons
They have already done what? Define who is or isn't a journalists? What law was that? My search may have been inadequate but I only came up with discussion about shield laws, which are by the states, not the feds, and those do not identify the 'nature' of journalist.
On the post: Utah Senate Passes Bill That Would Lock The Government Out Of Warrantless Access To Third Party Records
Almost there
I sure hope the Utah legislators realize that the NSA, CIA, DIA, and others are not 'law enforcement agencies' and expand the definition to all government agencies in the actual final legislation. I also hope that they specifically include phone companies, electric companies, other utilities, email providers (even if they don't have a 'presence' in their state), and cell phones, personal computers and tablets, thumb drives, portable hard drives, cloud accounts, and/or any other data retention method that exists, or will exist in the future. Then, when they get it right, the language could be presented to Congress, where this should be happening.
Next >>