> Nor when I pass a flock camera.
You are not, or at least, you think you are not.
How far removed are we from the federal government revoking the passports of everyone who attended a No Kings rally, anywhere in the country?
You are not, or at least, you think you are not.
How far removed are we from the federal government revoking the passports of everyone who attended a No Kings rally, anywhere in the country?
Many trans people have already had their passports revoked, for some there is no path to obtaining one again, and it is deeply unsettling to me.
Do you think it is Courts and the looming Midterms; or are they just flummoxed by the lack of good surveillance data?
It's really a fantasy and a silly Taboo.
Our Democracy will live or die by politics, not silly rules on data collection at the margins.
Mass surveillance at scale is not a trivial problem to solve, but Flock is both making it happen and making it clear that they are fine with enabling bad actors to take advantage of it.
Like maybe the "cheap cameras everywhere" part is novel + important, but "central data store" truly is not.
Slippery reasoning like this is how silly taboos get perpetuated.
Plus, data in FBI custody is nominally subject to laws and oversight in a way that privately held data is not.
Not a fantasy and the taboo has already been broken.
While losing access to global entry without due process isn’t the same thing as revoking a passport, it’s awfully close.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-30/minnesota...
At this point, the only way to preserve democracy would be to mostly dissolve the federal system, leaving states as democracies without the heavy hand and massive financial leverage from above.
States are closer to the right size for democracy to be resistant, but I think we’d need city-states of the metropolises, and big states like California would possibly need to subdivide.