Hacker News Reader

Comment by jonplackett | Hacker News Reader

There should be a distinction between helping the military and helping a police state.

Eg. Flock cameras don’t help the military but do help the police state.

Part of the reason we're seeing objectionable government action now is because we militarized law enforcement tasks and equipment in the post-9/11 era.

Let's not forget the War on Drugs -- that's been the baseline for police oppression for decades (well before 9/11).

Military tech often flows to cops.

In case of ground invasion (or just to detect enemy drones in the sky) having access tonlots of cameras is of military use.

I think you are just playing devil’s advocate.

Not a likely scenario, FWIW: https://www.military.com/history/5-reasons-why-geography-ame...

I would expect any invading forces would need to be surveilled by planes or satellites, or perhaps drones, since they would immediately destroy something like flock cameras.

You're assuming that the invaders can't just buy, hack, or social engineer, access to the cameras from Flock. Lately it has been social engineering: https://www.404media.co/floridas-wildlife-cops-are-searching... but there's also a concern that the cameras themselves have compromised supply chains and may serve other masters: https://www.404media.co/new-jersey-used-covid-relief-funds-t...

What’s more likely is that an aspiring dictator illegally uses the military for domestic police operations, then military and police use is the same thing.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/cour...

In the case of Iran, having access to tonlots of cameras proved to be an incredible assets for a neighbor’s military.

Exactly. I think cost reduction innovation in defense is generally acceptable by most people.

The constitution is legislation protecting you

It’s been pretty flimsy armor lately.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com