9 ms·
Still don’t know how this affects me. The use here seems to be for criminals on the run
by bobthebob 2mo ago
Still don’t know how this affects me. The use here seems to be for criminals on the run
- alistairSH 2mo agoSo, we're back to the "if you don't break the law, you have nothing to worry about" argument for overbearing policing?
- jasonlotito 2mo agoAgain, the article says otherwise. So do the police.
- ceejayoz 2mo agoPer the article, that doesn't appear to be the use case. > The innocuous appearance of many of the videos raises questions about whether the surveillance was necessary. In one “auto boost/strip”-related call, the drone follows two young men in their car, at least one of whom is described in police records as having been identified as a “suspicious person in a vehicle.” Then the two men emerge onto a basketball court and start playing, and the drone departs. > SFPD’s drone policy says operators must keep cameras trained on areas necessary to a mission and minimize the inadvertent collection of data about uninvolved people or places. It also instructs operators to take reasonable precautions, including turning cameras away, to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy. But the exposed Skydio feeds reviewed by WIRED showed full missions from takeoff to landing, capturing not only detentions and searches, but also streets, apartment buildings, rooftops, cars, courtyards, and bystanders who did not appear to be the subject of any police operation.