I often see people say that we don't have an expectation of privacy in public. However, it seems to me that ignores the nuance of actual social norms.<p>- Eavesdropping is generally considered anti-social.<p>- Taking up-skirt pictures in public is, I presume, illegal.<p>- If someone buys their prescriptions at a public grocery store, would it be alright for someone in the store to photograph their medical data?<p>It seems to me that the law needs to differentiate between the general sense in which one doesn't have privacy in public (e.g. the public probably has the right to know if a "family values" politician goes to a strip club) and actively spying on someone.<p>This is particularly the case when technology makes spying possible in a way that it wasn't previously. For example, I imagine it's not uncommon for many people to carry confidential information openly (say carrying a prescription in your hand as you walk to the grocery store) because it's not realistically possible for someone to read it and connect it to you. However, that changes with high speed photography, OCR, and facial recognition.
This story is a bit weird. The company is trying to repress publication of their catalog that was obtained from a FOIA act request directed at a small police department. Well this company is emailing their catalog at police departments nationwide. Fair enough but the catalog is certainly not a matter of national security as they are abusively claiming.<p>Their items are fairly boring and things that anyone here with a modicum of competence could hack together easily. Camera and transponder in a gravestone, child car seat, etc. basic stuff. Nothing is a big secret, why are they acting like it is? I guess to get attention. If a police department needs any of their items, they can save money hiring a high school student with modest skills and awareness of what's available on aliexpress.
Previous discussion: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022010" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022010</a><p>Copying my comments from there:<p>---<p>> In warning the site not to disclose the brochure, SSG’s attorney reportedly claimed the document is protected under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), though the notice did not point to any specific section of the law, which was enacted to regulate arms exports at the height of the Cold War.<p>We really need an overhaul of all these old laws that were enacted for a completely different era, which are now being misused. Another example is 200 year old laws being used to get companies to break encryption.<p>---<p>I don't know how I feel about hidden surveillance cameras in public. I know I shouldn't have any expectation of privacy in public and all that, but CCTV cameras in plain view are a different matter.<p>Are we going to live in a world where we're constantly being recorded and analysed by hidden cameras? This makes me very uneasy. Whatever happened to the idea that democratic governments should be for the people?<p>I'm sure there's no way that this can ever possibly be misused /s.<p>If agencies are using these for surveillance on specific targets then that's maybe okay, but as far as I'm aware, there is not much regulation regarding hidden cameras in public - at least, not in many parts of the world.
Is there a price?<p>Taking a raspberrypi zero, a camera, 4g modem, a couple of batteries and a charge circuit can turn any large-enough object into a hidden camera, for <$100 + the price of object itself (+ some dremel-ing and superglue).
I find it more interesting that they are threatening journalists with civil lawsuits and criminal penalties for disclosing the contents of their advertising brochure than the actual contents of that brochure.
Am I the only one who thinks that in the future we might have with us at all times some sort of complex infrared video-camera-blocking tech, together with a sound jammer?
>The Tombstone Cam ...all inclusive system can be deployed for approximately two days with the include PB-180LiFePO4 battery."<p>Considering that the structure they have to work with has at least the appearance of hundreds of kilos of granite, so there's not a very tight constraint on weight or volume, I'd think they could at least provide for, even as an option, a battery that would last for a week or a month.<p>That, plus some of the prices quoted give me the impression that this company is one of those that charges silly money for mediocre engineering.
This in conjunction with 5G would make surveillance complete. I wouldn't be surprised if 5G got some free channel/band used specifically for "telemetry" from all 5G-capable devices around, transferring real-time audio etc.