It's over

Good by 4th amendment.

Hello thought crime.

google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-1373_83i7.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjXjYOY77nNAhWGgj4KHSYuCX4QFgghMAM&usg=AFQjCNFKAHXaUafrPVb3bfpIJI2XSNNxGQ&sig2=TXOkwqc3v0vPMqE0F9TQGg

Other urls found in this thread:

washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/the-new-way-police-are-surveilling-you-calculating-your-threat-score/2016/01/10/e42bccac-8e15-11e5-baf4-bdf37355da0c_story.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

They have a thing for scary lists and data mining lately.

I can see them harassing people with views they don't agree with, trying to make them pissed enough to get arrested for resisting arrest.

There's already a program that determines a suspects threat level before a traffic stop.

washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/the-new-way-police-are-surveilling-you-calculating-your-threat-score/2016/01/10/e42bccac-8e15-11e5-baf4-bdf37355da0c_story.html

This is thought crime, and kinda why I'm freaking out a little.

bump

Thanks bud.

The buildup to thought crime is happening.

Don't know exactly what to say about this, but I'd like to see this thread blow up.

>There's already a program that determines a suspects threat level before a traffic stop
Based on what? Car color?

Me too user.

I was thinking of telling /k/ but I don't want to get banned for off topic posts.

Description of the program used in link.

It skims through your social media posts and Web activity to determine if you're a high threat.

There is no disclosure on what qualifies as a threat, other than the obvious criminal records, especially when pertaining to social media posts and Web activity.

"Well, he's posted on Sup Forums, high threat level."

Bump.

That's scary. Makes London CCTV look like a fucking joke.

What? No?

They run a plate and see the car is registered to user Suckanut. K. Then what? You think they pull up user Suckanut's facebook, twitter, ....4 chan gold account? Are you retarded? How many user Suckanut's are there in the world? You think they're going to do anything based on facebook posts from a given name? What if the car is registered to user but Faggot Suckanut is the one driving?

That's exactly what the program does.

Read the link. I'm guessing it's based on IP, so it might not even be you the threat level is for.

I'm only guessing because they don't disclose how they determine someone is a threat, which anyone can see is worrying.

Reminder that libertarianism is dead.
Reminder that privacy is dead.
Reminder that it will only get worse.
Reminder that EVERYTHING, you've EVER done on your phone/computer is stored FOREVER
Reminder that you never come back from being a police state.
Reminder that 1984 was a textbook manual.

thank you for the new desktop

I don't entirely understand what this is about.
The 4th amendment is about search and seizure, right?
what does that have to do with "thought crime"
not trying to bait, I genuinely don't understand

To add, the wording describes "social media" and "deep web" activity.

Every one of us is fucked. Start getting excited.

No problem, I hope reverse image-search got you the original file successfu;ly

First two posts detail it pretty well, but...

Illegal searches are ok.
Harassment by police is ok.
Police can determine your threat based on Web activity.

Sup Forums will most likely flag you as a high threat level.
Enjoy being pulled over for absolutely nothing all the time until you make a mistake.

Some tips for internet privacy:

- Use Firefox
- Use NoScript and block all Javascript by default
- Use Request Policy
- Block all cookies by default, use addon like Cookie Monster for whitelisting cookies
- Setup Firefox to browse through Tor by default, only keep a whitelist of sites you can't use through Tor
- Use as much FOSS as possible, use Linux rather than Windows (which spies on you and has a backdoor)
- Don't use mainstream social media sites like Facebook
- Don't willingly give out your real identity online to entities like Google or Facebook

Pic related?

Can I get a tldr

also have a bump

Forgot one thing:

Use startpage rather than Google for your search engine.

No?

>all of this data at their fingertips and they still can't stop acts of terror

Whatever.

I looked into this some time after it was first announced. The journalist didn't understand it too well and Intrado let them exaggerate the capabilities of Beware.

I lost all the info I had on Beware, but it's pretty basic shit from what I do remember. It draws information from LexisNexis Risk/LexisNexis Legal databases. Beware left the impression on me that it was also an amalgam of a few other established smaller programs/databases from the same company. Possibly from West/LexisNexis too. AFAIK, their social media snooping capabilities were limited to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and possibly one other company. If I had to guess how they monitored local communities on Social Media I'd assume their capabilities were limited to public profiles. What I'm saying is, this is concerning: just not to the degree you claim it is.

Cop suspects guy of being drug dealer, confronts guy, another cop via radio tells the cop that the guy has an arrest warrant for unrelated reasons. Cop arrests guy and searches and seizes his property in response to the arrest. Finds drugs. Guy is charged with drug possession. Guy says it violates the fourth amendment for reasons that are quite frankly pretty stupid (the arrest and warrant were valid and so the search and seizure was valid. Even if the timing was very fortuitous for the cop's investigation it was hardly an end run around the law). Supreme Court has none of it. Libertarians cry themselves to sleep.

This, on the other hand, is pretty shitty. The court shit the bed.

>If I had to guess how they monitored local communities on Social Media I'd assume their capabilities were limited to public profiles.

These large companies all have data interchange programs, they aren't going to tell you if they get EDI from one another because the mutual agreements require confidentiality on the part of both parties.

Why would they?

There's no need to orchestrate a false flag when you can sit back, let it happen, and spend that time reinforcing a narrative.

>EDI files*

dat 33

Inb4 not having social media accounts is a red flag

I'm worried that they named "deep web" activity.

Could just be a boogeyman word they use, or an actual way to track Web activity.

Maybe. For the sake of argument there is a PR paper trail leading up to the launch of Beware that states fairly clearly which companies they collaborated with to make the product. Beware gets its capabilities from some kind of partnership with Media Sonar Technologies, Inc. Here's a paste from their website describing Media Sonar's capabilities for the end user.

"DISCOVER

Set up unlimited geo-fences for location-based data
Search on hashtags, keywords and topics
Aggregate data real-time
Categorize and label data

ANALYZE


Target data using industry-leading filter capabilities
Gain insight through link analysis
Identify key topics and sentiment
Save customized searches
Export data

RESPOND

Mitigate volatile situations
Protect assets
Deploy resources effectively"

That's a good question. I don't know if it's just a buzzword or not. If it makes you feel better, Fresno PD were denied further funding for Beware.

Government/Corporations will spy on your computer usage, this is nothing new.

The problem here is that almost everyone in this thread is probably using Microsoft Windows, voluntarily signed up for sites like Facebook or Google, do nothing to protect their privacy online, and use all kinds of malicious proprietary software.

Don't give them anything to work with, and you won't care when they announce some new anti-privacy scheme.

who the fuck actually uses win10?

That just means it's out of alpha.

There's no reason, especially in California why the PD wouldn't advocate for a better system.

Deepweb isn't a buzzword, it just means websites that can only be accessed via a specific client (usually .onion tor sites).

jewish shills

I'm aware.

I was thinking the capabilities to comb through deep web searches would be wildly invasive, so it was safer to assume it was a buzzword used to describe places like Sup Forums.

The reason I doubt they mean Onion sites is because the press releases often use the phrase "deep Web searches" which is really fucking vague.

Me:
>wow, OP's pic sure is nightmare fuel

My brain:
>lol click on it an save it lmao!

Why does this happen?

You have something to hide?

Why did pt Barnum freakshows exist?/

I'll bump with more Bosch for you.

...

...

...

...

And a Dürer.

Question: What happens when an unconstitutional stop leads to a warrant, which leads to evidence?


Here's the situation:
>Guy goes to a house suspected of dealing drugs.
>Guy walks to convenience store.
>Guy is unconstitutionally stopped by cop who has been spying on him.
>While stopped, Cop runs the guy's name.
>Cop finds outstanding warrant for traffic violation.
>Cop conducts a search under these circumstances
>Cop obtains evidence from a stop which began as unconstitutional.
>Guy conditionally pleads guilty, but still appealed his case.
>Utah supreme court says it was not a valid arrest and therefore suppressed the drug evidence.

Opinion:
>4th Amendment from a different time
>The exclusionary rule allows us to suppress evidence anyway
>Since it was an illegal stop, the drug evidence could not be admitted anyway.
>Illegally obtained evidence is admissible if acquired through a secondary independent source.
>Cop was negligent and did not record events or question witness correctly.
>"The discovery of that warrant broke the causal chain between the unconstitutional stop and the discovery of evidence"
>Guy is an idiot because when the cop started saying "Is that a drug house you cam out of?" the guy pleaded guilty to drug possession.

...

Also disable IPv6. An IPv4 address means nothing, but IPv6 will point straight back to your machine.

>what is rfc4941