• Skoobie@lemmy.film
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So this means I’m allowed to fly my drone over prison yards then, right?

    Edit: Also, doesn’t that then make it legal for folks to capture the drones? It’s on their property.

      • Skoobie@lemmy.film
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wait, we don’t own our property airspace? So then, and I’m not being facetious, the entire plot of the 2010 film Burlesque is complete bullshit?

        I figured a drone over a prison was a no and I was just being humorous but the citizen’s lack of property airspace sucks. I get it for like a mile above your house because of planes, but drone height? That’s stupid.

        What if the drone touches the ground or a surface that connects to the ground like a rooftop? Is it fair game then?

        • gullible@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Pretty sure you own ~100 feet above, 20 feet below and nothing further. If the police stay above a hundred feet then there’s no legal recourse for their spying. And now I’m going to read the article to learn why they’re spying on peoples’ 9/11 parties.

          Edit: “an annual Caribbean festival marking the end of slavery that brings thousands of revelers”

          • Skoobie@lemmy.film
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            My best guess is simply that it’s Labor Day weekend. People party a decent bit over it. And when people party, there’s a chance for cops to make some money, I mean arrests for dangerous dangerous crimes against society.

            • gullible@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I ninja’d you. It’s black people. They deployed drones because of black people. If police weren’t so eager to fit their stereotype, this would almost be unexpected.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I honestly don’t know. Maybe they could equipt them with powerful microphones that can record the conversations of the people below. They would help with putting a stop to thought crime. The police could then use automated speech analysis to determine if you are comiting thought crime and activate the appropriate response.

      Afyer the initial reponse they could remove the person and their friends and family from society. It would be a challenging task updating the records to show that these terrorists never existed. You would also need to make sure that the people around are aware that there own memories are wrong.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The New York City police department plans to pilot the unmanned aircrafts in response to complaints about large gatherings, including private events, over Labor Day weekend, officials announced Thursday.

    The plan drew immediate backlash from privacy and civil liberties advocates, raising questions about whether such drone use violated existing laws for police surveillance

    “It’s a troubling announcement and it flies in the face of the POST Act,” said Daniel Schwarz, a privacy and technology strategist at the New York Civil Liberties Union, referring to a 2020 city law that requires the NYPD to disclose its surveillance tactics.

    The move was announced during a security briefing focused on J’ouvert, an annual Caribbean festival marking the end of slavery that brings thousands of revelers and a heavy police presence to the streets of Brooklyn.

    But as the technology proliferates, privacy advocates say regulations have not kept up, opening the door to intrusive surveillance that would be illegal if conducted by a human police officer.

    Cahn, the privacy advocate, said city officials should be more transparent with the public about how police are currently using drones, with clear guardrails that prevent surveillance overreach in the future.


    The original article contains 578 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!