Whether To Design Open Source Public Records Equipment

[Punk-Stasi 2.0]

On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 14:59:57 -0400
Karl <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:

> >         well, surveill the authorities all you want. Put a camera in every
> > cop's bathroom...
> >
> 
> I mean recording their public presence for accountability as public
> figures, not violating their pricacy.  

	I wasn't being sarcastic. So again, surveill the authorities in any way you wish - they don't have any 'right to privacy'. Actually the authorities should be beaten to death. They don't have any right all. They forfeited their rights long ago,


> Sorry for the obscure "sousveil" word.  Got it from wikipedia long ago.

	dont worry, I know what it means
	
> 
> 
> >         But that's very different from 'wearing' some device that records
> > everything around you. That is not surveilling the authorities but spying
> > on everybody within the reach of your cameras.
> >
> 
> It sounds like this is dangerous and should be discussed before actually
> producing.  Are you able to relate around making something that could do
> that respectful of others?  Maybe we could even influence present-day cell
> phones and digital cameras somehow.
> 
> It is primarily for when your life is imminently threatened, which is
> neither all the time nor everywhere and could theoretically be paired with
> a call to 911.

	....call to what? 



> 
>         As a side note of sorts, the argument (just an assertion actually)
> > that it's ok to record people on 'public property' is exactly govcorp's
> > 'argument' eh?
> >
> 
> The difference is that I like consensus, so it is only okay if
> _absolutely_everybody_visible_ by it says that it is okay.  


	That\s good. So it turns out that whetehr it's OK or not to surveill people has nothing to do with 'public property' or even 'private property' and evenything to do with individual  consent. 


> I was trying to
> mention providing it when it is specifically requested by a community.
> 
> It sounds like there's value around the device that prevents the operation
> of nearby cameras too.
	

	Indeed. That would be an actual cypherpunk project. The pixel clock rate trick is clever, but I doubt it's practical. It can be countered by RF shielding of the camera probably. 
	
	It would be better to point something like an IR laser at the camera and destroy the sensor. Question is, how do to that without getting caught? 

	What about a microwave beam? Could that fry any unshielded electronic device?


 
> >