Big Brother in Memorial Park

I do not believe I ever used the word "police" in any of my comments.

deleted dupe.

arturosfan said:

Robert_Casotto said:
there is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public park. Hence the "public" park.

what do you mean by that exactly? you like being watched everywhere you go?

No. In fact i require everyone within a three hundred foot radius to avert their eyes at all times. Or else

.

Robert_Casotto said:

arturosfan said:

Robert_Casotto said:
there is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public park. Hence the "public" park.

what do you mean by that exactly? you like being watched everywhere you go?

No. In fact i require everyone within a three hundred foot radius to avert their eyes at all times. Or else

It might be worth supplementing this naive view of public privacy with a look at the issues noted by the Church Committee. The issues that were pertinent then have not changed because of advances in digital technology.

http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/94755_II.pdf

What is the value of freedom of association? Why do we have a First Amendment?

An interesting example of the collision of these ideas came up in United States vs. Antoine Jones. when GPS tracking was used on a vehicle without warrant to track all the suspect's motions for an extended period.

http://www.wired.com/2010/09/public-privacy/

http://nation.time.com/2013/08/01/privacy-and-the-law-how-the-supreme-court-defines-a-controversial-right/slide/privacy-from-gps-and-tracking-devices/

A comment from the appellate case quoted in the wired article:

"who knows all of another’s travels can deduce whether he is a weekly churchgoer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups — and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts."

Justice Sotomayor noted: "Awareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms. And the Government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse."

max_weisenfeld said:
I do not believe I ever used the word "police" in any of my comments.

No, you did not. I just wanted to note that focusing on government surveillance only is like focusing on the tip of the iceberg. I have the impression that Google and Facebook , for example, know things about us that the government can only dream about knowing.

https://noscript.net/

https://duckduckgo.com

https://adblockplus.org/

http://socialfixer.com/

Cameras are everywhere; and I'm not counting the smart phone cams. I'm still trying to figure out where the camera lens is at my bank's ATM machine, but I don't want to appear suspicious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8i01bL9a8Q

At my first job out of college I worked in a manufacturing facility. All the hourly workers (including me) punched the clock. They suspected two maintenance workers on the third shift were punching in and out for each other, so they installed a hidden camera over the clock. They guys were caught red-handed. In the meantime, they were filming everyone else as well.

Adam_West said:

Robert_Casotto said:

arturosfan said:

Robert_Casotto said:
there is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public park. Hence the "public" park.

what do you mean by that exactly? you like being watched everywhere you go?

No. In fact i require everyone within a three hundred foot radius to avert their eyes at all times. Or else

It might be worth supplementing this naive view of public privacy with a look at the issues noted by the Church Committee. The issues that were pertinent then have not changed because of advances in digital technology.
http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/94755_II.pdf

What is the value of freedom of association? Why do we have a First Amendment?

An interesting example of the collision of these ideas came up in United States vs. Antoine Jones. when GPS tracking was used on a vehicle without warrant to track all the suspect's motions for an extended period.
http://www.wired.com/2010/09/public-privacy/

http://nation.time.com/2013/08/01/privacy-and-the-law-how-the-supreme-court-defines-a-controversial-right/slide/privacy-from-gps-and-tracking-devices/

A comment from the appellate case quoted in the wired article:
"who knows all of another’s travels can deduce whether he is a weekly churchgoer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups — and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts."
Justice Sotomayor noted: "Awareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms. And the Government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse."

Adam,

You're trying to make a point which escapes me.

Would you please elaborate.

TomR