
Boston Police use fake social media accounts to phish indie rock show info - morisy
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2013/03/boston_police_catfishing_indie_rockers_cops_pose_as_punks_on_the_internet.html
======
ChuckMcM
Presumably you could give these folks disinformation and check to see if the
cops show up. I am not sure why anyone would think police on social media
would be any more suave than police in real life. As far back as high school
the attempts by law enforcement to get a jump on where the 'bad thing' of the
week was going to happen were pretty transparent. I could never figure out if
that was on purpose to put people on notice they cared (like driving around a
neighborhood to let people know they are watching, showing the colors as it
were) or if they were just that clueless.

~~~
tsumnia
> ...was on purpose to put people on notice they cared (like driving around a
> neighborhood to let people know they are watching, showing the colors as it
> were

Police officers follow what is known as "force continuum". This basically
outlines how much force they should be using in any situation. Without
deviating from the topic, this is where the public gets upset when an officer
oversteps their bounds to use excessive force on someone. The first 'level' of
all continuum protocols is simply 'presence'. Knowing a cop is around does
stop a majority of people who would do illegal activity. Think about how you
act next time a cop is behind you on the road. It's a passive power-play move;
they need to keep up this presence to ensure the public knows they'll be a
moment's notice away if something happens.

Moving cops to social media sounds perfectly logical to me. A lot of none-the-
wiser people put this information on the internet, thinking its safe. By
making an online presence known, they look to quell some people's actions.

You could argue people will just find other ways to circumvent the system, but
I'm reminded of the constant rat race between White and Black Hat security
specialists; each party trying to top the other.

~~~
steveklabnik
At least in activist circles, this kind of situation has been around for
years, and security culture evolves to deal with it. Of course, that's a bit
more serious then a show, but it's the same basic problem.

~~~
SethMurphy
In NYC becoming an undercover activist for the purpose of spying on lawful
activities is illegal, as it should be, because of the Handshu agreement:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handschu_agreement>

~~~
ryguytilidie
I'm sure DAs around NYC will be prosecuting this with the full force of the
law. /sarcasm

~~~
regerg
They are, but you don't see it because they send cops undercover to police
stations to impersonate police impersonating activists.

------
dustmop
The same thing happened years ago to New Brunswick, New Jersey, a college town
that produced some very successful artists in the past 2 decades: Lifetime,
The Bouncing Souls, Thursday, Gaslight Anthem. Around 2006, the cops started
scouring Myspace for shows and permanently shut down a number of popular house
venues. Since then, the punks have responded by moving all info to the
sneakernet; you can't find out any show details unless you're actually friends
with someone who already knows a band or the house owner. Even physical flyers
don't have addresses or exact times. It's effectively killed most of the
output that this cultural hotspot used to produce.

~~~
mikeweiss
Hey There! I live in New Brunswick, NJ. Sounds like you were around a few
years ago. I live in a show house and also put together a little show calendar
app at <http://nbshows.org> which has been up for over a year now. It gets
about 100 unique hits a day.

There are never any address posted on it. Whenever someone emails
staff@nbshows.org and asks for address's I am always careful about giving out
info, I always google the email to make sure its not a throw-away.

I am really excited that this topic is on HN today, because I am working on a
personal project that will be at <http://diyshws.org>. Basically it will be a
site where people can create show calendars for the small city that they live
in if there is no central way to find out about shows. (other than Facebook)

------
ehutch79
It should be known that most of the places in this article are in densely
packed, residential neighborhoods. (I've been to them) Some of these places
share walls with their neighbors, so sound isolation is non existent at some
'venues'. Also no attempts are made at controlling sound levels outside.

Also keep in mind many young punks are not exactly respectful of others. The
word entitled comes to mind with a lot of their behaviour.

I say this as an aging punk who had a basement where we held 50+ shows with
nationally touring bands playing. We never had a problem with being shut down.

~~~
adg
If the noise levels are too high, why not let the neighbors call it in? It
seems like a waste of time to proactively try to find parties when they could
just wait around at night for people to call in the noise violations.

------
comex
msisto, you appear to be hellbanned.

> I remember being at a basement show in Allston when I was 18 that was broken
> up by the cops and thinking "This is so fucking cool". I mean, it's a pain
> in the ass and sucks for the bands. It can totally ruin your night, but for
> me it totally fanned the flames and made me love it even more.

> What this article doesn't mention is that the cop who was using the
> Lemmingtrail board to find out about house shows kept posting even after
> being outed, eventually being somewhat-ironically accepted into the
> community. I regularly saw him at shows after he'd been exposed and he was
> always friendly.

~~~
jjb123
does anyone know if you can just ask them if they are a cop; with them having
to respond truthfully? or is this just idiotic folklore that i've somehow
heard.

~~~
derleth
> does anyone know if you can just ask them if they are a cop; with them
> having to respond truthfully?

Of course police can lie about being police officers. Another person kind-of
answered already, but this apparently needs to be stated unambiguously: _A
police officer can lie to you about being a police officer and get away with
it._

~~~
myke_cameron
<http://www.erowid.org/freedom/police/police_info6.shtml>

------
hluska
This reminds me of throwing raves in the 1990s. At first, we had a culture
where the DJs or promoters would invite you to the (usually illegal) location
of the party. In response to busts, that evolved to where the DJs or promoters
would invite you to a pick up point where someone would drive you to the
actual (still illegal) venue. As promoters started making serious money, real
entrepreneurs emerged and started booking big shows at legal venues. That
increased costs, so promoters started charging for water and getting sponsors.

Long story long, kids will always throw renegade events and police will always
use whatever tools to stop these events. And, in response, kids will keep
changing their tactics until they either find a line that police won't cross,
or until they turn legal! :)

------
guard-of-terra
Congratulations, now you're officially worse than USSR.

In USSR, independent bands had very hard time recording or playing on stage,
but they could always gather on some flat and play music and nobody bothered
them. (Don't know why, maybe it's actually illegal for police to enter your
home, maybe it's just decency)

And now it's illegal in the USA.

All this does is destroying all the new music that isn't profitable/hot enough
to afford real venues yet. Talk so much about innovation and garages.

~~~
pessimizer
This isn't new. Depending on the town, time of day(or night), and whether you
take money, house shows are often illegal. Not entirely unreasonable, if you
think of it from the perspective of the neighbors.

Of course, kids should always be trying to throw them, and cops and narcs
should always be trying to shut them down. It's the natural order of the
world:)

~~~
guard-of-terra
Did neighbors complain? No they didn't, or the police would not need their
lame social networks act.

~~~
pessimizer
Not yet, but it might be illegal because they're charging for a show without
being licensed, or a myriad of other reasons. There have always been narcs,
though. The kids may find @notpolice funny because of their experiences
online, but in the 90s I ran into that guy a lot on the street.

~~~
guard-of-terra
"it might be illegal because they're charging for a show without being
licensed, or a myriad of other reasons"

That's exactly what's the "worse than USSR" part is about.

~~~
pessimizer
What I'm saying is if that makes the US worse than the USSR, then the US was
always worse than the USSR. If the legality of urban house shows is your key
metric for freedom, then maybe reconsider using the USSR as your baseline.

~~~
guard-of-terra
I highly value legality of doing anything not immediately life threatening in
my house because it's my last line of defense. Last line of privacy.

Even if you take the street, the workplace and the indoors away (by the means
of tight and hostile control) your home is still your home. And if you gave up
your home as a step one you will not have a place to fall back, a place to
default to.

You can no longer say "Screw you guys I'm going home".

Now all your life depends on others (authorities) agreeing to let you do
whatever you are doing, because you don't have one place where you are that
authority.

------
SethMurphy
What is wrong about this is not that the police are on social media (I expect
them to be), but they are assuming a crime will be committed before the fact.
Playing music in your house with a few friends over is not illegal. If there
are too many friends or the music is too loud, then shut it down after a crime
has been committed.

~~~
lmm
We're not talking about some kind of loitering with intent crap; these people
had a clear, premeditated intention to break the law. If you announce publicly
that you're going to commit a crime at a given time and place, don't be
surprised if the police turn up to that place at that time and arrest you.

~~~
SethMurphy
Did they say things would get unruly? Did they say minors would be drinking?
Did they say the neighbors would complain because the music is too loud? Did
they say they would be breaking fire codes? What crime did they publicly
announce? The police are making a lot of assumptions (right or wrong) before
the fact.

------
LandoCalrissian
It's more disheartening that this is what the police are spending their time
doing. There seriously isn't anything more important they could be working on?

~~~
Domenic_S
If you've ever tried to go to sleep and had loud neighbors you might feel
differently...

~~~
myke_cameron
Its one thing for neighbors to complain about loud and obnoxious people around
them. Its a whole other thing for the police to preemptively break up shows.
Some of the house spots that have been shut down in the past 6 months have
been operating without complaint from neighbors for years.

Beyond that, the crackdown has been felt the most in the shutting down of art
and show spaces in Allston warehouses which are zoned appropriately. Granted,
the proprietors of these spots don't bother with permits from the city /
following fire code, and often encourage or engage in illegal activity beyond
simply hosting loud music, but these venues are definitely NOT disturbing
neighbors (the neighbors in this case are generally rehearsal spaces for punk
bands and other similar performance spaces).

~~~
stcredzero
_> Granted, the proprietors of these spots don't bother with permits from the
city / following fire code_

The fire code is no joke. People used to die in batches of hundreds all of the
time before those laws and reforms were put in place.

------
zalew
well, at least those indies bothered to hide their time and location. this is
what happened to tuners/streetracers in Poland recently on fb
<http://i1.minus.com/jbdZ3dwKcOnWYB.png> (translation: fb event "Nightly
gathering of powerful cars. Tesco parking lot." Police: attending for sure :))

------
bagosm
But... why? First of all if it bothers the neighbours why can't they just
arrive on the spot and bust the thing?

Also, all this planning ahead and resources, why instead don't they just
create one or two halls per area that are soundproof etc and let people rock
out?

Is the state really that stupid?

~~~
saraid216
> First of all if it bothers the neighbours why can't they just arrive on the
> spot and bust the thing?

Because these neighbors complained so loud that they passed a city-wide law on
the matter.

> Also, all this planning ahead and resources, why instead don't they just
> create one or two halls per area that are soundproof etc and let people rock
> out?

You should itemize the budgets for both of these plans and compare them. I'm
willing to bet that setting up "one or two halls per area" costs an order of
magnitude more than what they're doing.

~~~
bagosm
First of all I'm sure they could find an unused estate to convert into what
they want. The dudes are used to playing in houses, I'm sure they wont mind if
its not a perfect concert hall.

Also, taxes on tickets and stuff or other promotions or rent for the night
could very much turn into a big profit.

About the law, I don't have anything against the law, just that I can't
understand why would they be so obsessed with preemptive action instead of on-
the-spot

~~~
saraid216
> First of all I'm sure they could find an unused estate to convert into what
> they want. The dudes are used to playing in houses, I'm sure they wont mind
> if its not a perfect concert hall.

"The dudes" might be okay with it, but the city would own that venue and not
only do they have to obey their own law on how it's maintained and regulated,
but they'd be liable for anything that happened inside it. Further, if the
city owns it, they're going to use it for more than just "the dudes", and
_those_ people may have different requirements.

> Also, taxes on tickets and stuff or other promotions or rent for the night
> could very much turn into a big profit.

You're assuming that (1) anyone will rent the space and (2) anyone will come
if they do. These aren't minor assumptions.

> About the law, I don't have anything against the law, just that I can't
> understand why would they be so obsessed with preemptive action instead of
> on-the-spot

How much effort have you even bothered putting into stepping into their shoes
rather than tyrannically deciding that your solution fixes all possible ills
and should stand in for any agency on their part?

------
ghostDancer
I suspect the phrase on the internet nobody knows you're a dog gets a new
meaning now :-)

~~~
Samuel_Michon
On the Internet, everybody knows you're a pig ;)

~~~
zalew
funnily, in my language we call policemen dogs instead of pigs, so it applies
perfectly.

------
JonnieCache
It's always the clean shoes at 5am which give the game away.

~~~
steveklabnik
Before others vote this down, many activists have been arrested by the pairs
of shoes they're wearing, and many an attendee of an action has been deemed
suspicious because of their shoes.

~~~
regerg
That has nothing to do with what JohnnyCache was saying. JohnnyCache was
saying that cops put on a punk "costume" but forget to muss up their clean
shoes, unlike actual punks who are out all night eating and drinking and
running around and generally making a mess.

~~~
steveklabnik
Ahh, that makes sense too.

------
tathagatadg
I'm not being able to find any reference to understand why this is considered
illegal. (DIY + music) sounds very cool!

Drugs? Too loud?

~~~
LeafStorm
Too loud. (But if drugs were involved, that certainly wouldn't help.)

------
careersuicide
This is exactly the reason why pretty much every house show no longer gets its
location listed on Facebook or on flyers where I live. Instead we just put
"ask a punk" for the address. You have to be in the know or you won't find
out. Unfortunately it's a bit of a turn-off for younger people and anyone who
isn't good friends with someone already involved in the scene. The alternative
is to have every show busted before it can even start.

------
brownbat
I wonder how this interacts with the right to peaceably assemble, especially
given the often political nature of punk music.

Cities can police nuisances, sure, but they cannot craft statutes abrogating
first amendment rights that are not narrowly tailored to the perceived harm.

There were a few laws against public dancing in the late 1800s that got struck
down under this sort of reasoning.

I'm not sure what the current state of constitutional limits on nuisance laws
are, but the Boston statute does seem very broad.

------
burningion
This is one of the larger, emerging problems with social media. Interested
groups can create large amounts of dummy accounts to manipulate the group
discussion. This is already happening on a large scale on reddit.

What we need is machine learning systems to help us identify the astroturfers
who run dummy accounts to influence the group discussion.

The question is, who is going to build it?

~~~
victorh
Sorry mate, it would be about one billion times more profitable to write a
machine learning system to astroturf group discussions.

------
largesse
Wouldn't that violate Facebook's TOS and therefore the Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act?

~~~
victorh
No that's just for young adults downloading files that someone regrets making
available publicly.

------
youngerdryas
Single page.

[http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2013/0...](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2013/03/boston_police_catfishing_indie_rockers_cops_pose_as_punks_on_the_internet.single.html)

It wouldn't be fun if the cops approved, would it?

