
Surveillance plane starts flying over Baltimore - jbegley
https://www.wbaltv.com/article/baltimore-police-surveillance-plane-starts-flying-recording-everyones-movements/32346318
======
JoeAltmaier
Clearly the 'film only public spaces' argument is specious. It films everybody
in their back yard, in their walled lot, in their private green space. It
can't distinguish public from private from 10000 feet.

As I understand how its used, somebody robs a liquor store and drives away.
Maybe 10 days later a detective gets a warrant for the footage from that day,
finds the part where they drove away, then follows the footage _backward_ to
the part where they left their house. Then drives over and arrests them. Kind
of like a time machine, or Minority Report in reverse.

~~~
phyzome
I think the movie you're looking for is Enemy of the State.

~~~
marcosdumay
Enemy of the State is in real time. I guess at the time nobody could assume we
would be able to record widely enough and store the video for long enough to
retrospectively pursue people.

~~~
bookofjoe
If you liked "Enemy of the State" you will like "Eye in the Sky"
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_in_the_Sky_(2015_film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_in_the_Sky_\(2015_film\))

------
TheAdamAndChe
"It can't film onto private places" they say as they record private property
across the city. This is a disgusting encroachment upon our lives. Even if
they can find a technical loophole to make it legal, it's the kind of action
that degrades trust in the government and strengthens militias and anti-
government behavior.

------
spodek
> Images are stored for 45 days and can be used only for criminal
> investigation.

Anyone who believes that, I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

> [Police Commissioner Michael] Harrison sees no privacy concern.

I can see him saying he considers the crime fighting value of data gained
greater than the privacy lost, but to see _no_ concern sounds like lack of
empathy, compassion, and competence.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Understandable response. But this is far from the first city to do this.
Previous cities, the company involved is separate from the police force, and
requires a warrant to reveal any footage. Any slipup, they lose their
contract. So _some_ incentives to keep it honest.

~~~
noad
That is much, much worse. If it's a private company they can skirt FOIA and
coverup abuse much more easily. The government is getting too good at this
outsourcing of all risk and liability.

------
tomohawk
There is a murder in Baltimore just about every day. It is an incredibly
violent city.

This interview with David Simon "The Wire" provides insight.

[https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/29/david-simon-
on...](https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/29/david-simon-on-baltimore-
s-anguish)

Beating up on the police department has become a favorite past time of the
politicians, with the predictable result that officers are unwilling to go
after criminals unless it is very cut and dried. This is likely why this plane
is being pushed - it would provide clear evidence without hard police work
that is impossible to do in the political climate of the city.

~~~
marcosdumay
Wasn't Baltimore that was in the news all over the world a few years ago
because of police officers blatantly pursuing black people?

~~~
ganoushoreilly
It was more nuanced than that given the population. Interestingly the writer
of the wire and the original cast announced a new show about Baltimore and the
police specifically is in the works.

------
mtharrison
There was a great Radiolab episode about this system back in 2015:
[https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-s...](https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-
sky)

------
dividuum
Probably related Radiolab episode covering a similar/same(?) system:
[https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-s...](https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-
sky)

------
AlecSchueler
So they feel that it's ok because there is no expectation of privacy in public
places? Could I really choose someone and follow them every time they left
their home? Or is there also an element of it being indiscriminate at play?
This is so ridiculous and outrageous to me.

I'm a European myself but it sounds like everything America was set up on the
hope of avoiding. What about all those people who advocate gun rights? Why
aren't they up on arms, either metaphorically or even literally, about this?

~~~
sneak
Sadly, most of the gun rights supporters in the US seem to fall in the
partisan camp that unwaveringly supports the police and the military, no
matter how many civil and human rights those organizations seem to infringe.
(It's confusing to me, too.)

(An aside: Posting a similar wonder as you just did recently got me permbanned
from Twitter after 12 years of daily use and ~10k followers. You're apparently
not even allowed _ask questions_ about guns and cops in the same sentence over
there, even if it's not your own guns you're asking about. No response
whatsoever to support/appeal inquiries. It's toast.)

The other team, they make noises about human rights and equal protection, but
have no practical means to induce the police to comply, due to decades of
having voted in those states to deny themselves even optional/opt-in access to
the types of weapons the police carry in every single police vehicle just
meters from them on a daily basis.

Meaningful nonviolent physical resistance in most of the more populated places
in the US is thus now totally infeasible, as we have learned in places like
Ferguson or New York City as the police are significantly better armed than
any group that they wish to subdue, legally or illegally. (For a long time I
thought this was a new development until eventually learning about Kent State
when I was in my mid 20s.)

For example, during the 2008 RNC in New York just before W's second term, the
NYPD were able to illegally imprison several thousand peaceful political
protesters for a whole weekend in temporary concentration camps with total
impunity due to this physical power imbalance, which resulted a few years
later in an amazing $800M civil rights violation settlement (paid for out of
tax money, of course; none of the police who orchestrated the illegal mass
kidnapping suffered any negative consequences).

At higher levels, both "sides" are fully in agreement about the total
commitment to continuous war and widespread illegal domestic surveillance. It
seems that there are absolutely zero available political choices for "no
widespread unchecked surveillance, no forever war" in the US any longer.

...and so the problem continues unabated.

~~~
jsjohnst
> For example, during the 2008 RNC in New York just before W's second term

You might want to fact check your data there. W’s second term started several
years before 2008.

~~~
sneak
Oops, you're right. It was 2004, not 2008.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Republican_National_Conve...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Republican_National_Convention_protest_activity)

------
kratom_sandwich
Quick google search turned out an alternate source:

[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/us/baltimore-
surveillance...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/09/us/baltimore-surveillance-
planes-aclu.html)

------
neverartful
How are individuals identified? It's one thing to have street-level cameras,
but something else entirely when it's a plane flying at 10,000 feet. Perhaps
I'm naive, but it seems like it would be extremely difficult to accurately
identify a person that way (barring NSA/CIA/military level technology and
sophistication). What am I missing?

Even with my doubts, I'm extremely opposed to such surveillance!

~~~
LargoLasskhyfv
Would a demo of what is possible at 4000 feet suffice?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L80HDdS7Wg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L80HDdS7Wg)
(4min33sec)

Or what was state of the art at DARPA in 2013?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGxNyaXfJsA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGxNyaXfJsA)
(4min40sec)

Edit: Or more commonly available, just search for "Nikon Superzoom" on
youtube, and watch some short demos there. And then imagine those pointed in
all directions downwards, the videostream(s) saved to some small storage
array, or even transmitted live to some ground station(s), indexed and
overlaid on something like google maps, just better, with a time slider. Mark
some car at some point (in time) and see where it moves...and so on.

Edit: like _THIS_ [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptSeU-
OnI8E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptSeU-OnI8E) (3min13sec)

Edit: Oh! And something from 2016 about "The Surveillance Firm Recording
Crimes From Baltimore's Skies" (7min29sec)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRa-
AucbN6k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRa-AucbN6k)

Another demo of the same thing from the same person/company in another town,
also 2016: "The Eyes in the Sky That Catch Murders on Tape"
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJLr0KMsRAA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJLr0KMsRAA)
(5min)

So why is this news?

~~~
neverartful
Thanks for providing the links. Despite the impressive cameras and processing
capabilities to go with them, I believe that it would be simple to counter.
Adding any of baseball caps or other hats, sunglasses, jackets, face mask, or
gloves should make it far more difficult to identify a person. Carry a
backpack of accessories and change them to further confuse. A person can make
their movements harder to track by traveling non-direct routes, back-tracking,
and moving in and out of buildings.

The bigger problem is that ordinary citizens shouldn't be under that kind of
surveillance EVER. It's good to have these things brought to light and
discussed (especially the downsides and all potential for abuse).

~~~
LargoLasskhyfv
There is this thing called
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gait_analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gait_analysis)
and how it is applied [https://www.businessinsider.de/international/ai-
training-bey...](https://www.businessinsider.de/international/ai-training-
beyond-facial-recognition-gait-detection-heartbeat-sensors-2019-10/)

------
verytrivial
Radiolab ran a story from the "Note to Self" podcast in 2015 about trials for
persistent surveillance of this sort.

[https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-s...](https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-
sky)

"Then, once we realize what we can do, we wonder whether we should."

------
chrisbuc
Archive.org:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20200505113005/https://www.wbalt...](https://web.archive.org/web/20200505113005/https://www.wbaltv.com/article/baltimore-
police-surveillance-plane-starts-flying-recording-everyones-
movements/32346318)

------
madradavid
Naive question here. Is it illegal to build counter surveillance tech, I mean
you have companies that specialise in building these things for governments
would it be illegal to start a company that does the opposite, build tech that
helps people beat this sort of surveillance?

~~~
Teever
Better idea -- make products that let the public track law enforcement and
politicians in the same way that law enforcement is tracking people.

If police don't need a warrant to do something that probably means that it's
legal to do, right?

~~~
sneak
This is an excellent way to learn about how criminal law is not applied
equally in the United States, but instead is wielded as a weapon selectively
against anyone who would challenge the status quo.

There was a famous case recently where a judge ruled that searching someone's
trash didn't require a warrant as they had discarded it and it was no longer
"theirs", so cops were within their rights to search through it. Presumably
having been granted permission, some journalists then took it upon themselves
to inventory and publish the exact contents of the judge's trash, including
prescription medicine packaging and such. If I recall correctly, it didn't end
well for the journalists.

There are two different sets of laws, for two different sets of people in the
US.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Well, of course there are. "Warrantless search" is one category, and "search
by random person" is another. The 2nd is closer to harassment, in some
opinions.

It's not quite fair to compare actions by an officer of the court with that of
the general public. By design.

~~~
netsharc
Huh, seems like this argument doesn't go along with the "trash is no longer
your property" conclusion.

If you say the police can do it because he's a police officer [... and because
of that does it mean he has better judgement?], then why have a law about
warrants?

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Lots of possible differences remain. Entering private property to secure the
trash - an officer of the court can normally do that without being considered
harassment or trespass.

Being an officer of the court is important, and attempts to blur that are
disingenuous. Cherry-picking one facet of the incident is not a good argument.
What-about-isms likewise.

~~~
tantalor
> can normally do that

Not without a warrant

~~~
JoeAltmaier
If its urgent, or they have reasonable cause.

Again, with the cherry-picking.

~~~
tantalor
As in exigent circumstances?

That could actually fly if the officer had a reasonable belief the trash
contained relevant evidence, and the trash collector was going to take it away
before a warrant could be acquired.

------
papito
Or maybe the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency is doin' some testing.
After all, the NSA is in Baltimore.

[https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/20/the-multibillion-
dollar...](https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/20/the-multibillion-dollar-u-s-
spy-agency-you-havent-heard-of-trump/)

~~~
dx87
> After all, the NSA is in Baltimore.

No it isn't.

~~~
papito
Really? You are going to split those hairs?

~~~
Communitivity
Baltimore and Odenton are a decent distance apart, about a 30 minute drive.
Also, very few federal agencies are in just any one location; they tend to
have offices spread out across different states, or over the tri-state area.

------
tw04
So if someone is murdered in their backyard, and this thing filmed it, they
just won’t use the footage? What if it’s the mayor? The chief of police? The
president (yes I know he doesn't live in Baltimore and would be surrounded by
secret service)?

Call me skeptical...

------
thecybernerd
There’s an excellent book on this surveillance technology and the
ramifications called Eyes in the Sky. Talks about the military’s development
of Gorgon Stare and many of the domestic startups using the similar technology
to watch us.

~~~
bookofjoe
See:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_in_the_Sky_(2015_film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_in_the_Sky_\(2015_film\))

------
snt
Browser: Will you allow www.wbaltv.com to access your location? (I presume
they're also recording my movements)

------
peterwwillis
I would actually be fine with this kind of surveillance of my movements,
except that it's inaccurate. It could lead to falsely accusing people due to
circumstance, like why were you in that bad neighborhood so often? You must be
a drug mule. Or we saw a car just like yours go back and forth between the
scene of this crime, and we don't have proof it was anyone else behind the
wheel, so it must have been you.

I would actually feel better if this was used in conjunction with _even more
surveillance_. That way there's more data to rule out coincidental or
misleading information. It still wouldn't be _great_ , but it would be better
than this method alone. (They do already use cameras on cop cars to record
license plates of passing cars, and cameras at intersections that flag when
they register the sound of gunshots. This still isn't enough to correlate the
complex movements of organized crime across the city)

Another more positive way it could be used is for community outreach programs
to contact at risk youth, before they get deeply involved with gangs. Or to
document and protect the LGBT POC homeless youth, one of the most vulnerable
class of people in the US. Or to inform programs on overhauling public
transportation, to update bus routes or plan a new rail line better. Or public
health programs to battle drug addiction. Or to fine companies that dump waste
into the watershed that makes its way into the harbor. You could potentially
use this data for a lot of good.

Sadly, Baltimore's police have a long record of corruption, including planting
evidence, a private hit squad, violence, and abuse of surveillance methods
such as Stringrays. So even if I'd like to play devil's advocate, this is not
a city with a great track record. They need to make this program _very_
transparent to show it isn't abused.

~~~
taborj
I will never be fine with this kind of surveillance, in part because it can
never be accurate about _intentions._

Here, watch this, it's a good talk about why voluntarily providing information
will generally backfire on you:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE)

------
paypalcust83
Technologies used in neocolonial occupation and conquest will eventually be
applied domestically. It's only a matter of time before the US government
elites have a real-time panopticon like China and Reapers fire weapons from
the air at civilians.

------
jonnydubowsky
Does anyone know the resolution of this surveillance footage? I.e if I have a
house with lots of glass ceilings or greenhouses can it see at that detail?
Does this matter?

------
Chris2048
Sorry, this content is not available in your region.

~~~
smcleod
Out of interest where are you located and what browser are you using? (Works
in Australia. (iOS))

~~~
sschueller
Doesn't work in Switzerland, no GDPR here.

~~~
netsharc
Also from Switzerland. I never thought the lack of geographic^Wgeo-political
knowledge of the average American would affect me...

~~~
kube-system
This is the website of a local TV station on the other side of the planet. It
is just as likely that their legal counsel is aware that the Swiss were
contemplating new data protection laws at the time of GDPR implementation and
advised they err on the side of compliance.

I bet the management at TeleBärn doesn’t spend much time having nuanced legal
discussions about the difference between US and Canadian law either.

------
grimjack00
Maybe they'd get a better reaction if they said it would be used to enforce
social distancing edicts.

------
el_don_almighty
how many watts of LED powered infrared light is required to overcome the
camera's contrast capability? If I wear a tinfoil hat with a giant beam of
infrared light coming from the top, what do they see? what if we all do?

I'm off to walmart for some reynolds wrap

------
LargoLasskhyfv
Obligatory link to
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgon_Stare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgon_Stare)

------
loup-vaillant
> _Sorry, this content is not available in your region._

GDPR wall?

------
dilandau
Just wear a mask.

------
solarkraft
"Sorry, this content is not available in your region."

I see, you're also disrespecting people's privacy where it is legal. Alright.

[http://archive.vn/sR0Xo](http://archive.vn/sR0Xo)

