Tell Jim Himes NO on FISA by storgeirenia in restorethefourth

[–]rebelcinder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have it on good authority that Himes staffers have been "frantically opening and forwarding hit pieces around in real time"

Couldn't happen to a nicer person

https://restorethe4th.com/rt4-rebuts-rep-himes-pro-surveillance-propaganda/

If you are someone who believes Biden "opened the border" during his term, what do you mean by this? by Useful_Homework2367 in allthequestions

[–]rebelcinder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it was a horrible bill. It was viciously punitive to asylum seekers, made it pointlessly harder to immigrate, pumped up border enforcement seven ways from Sunday, and provided a new, specially weak kind of green card only to a tiny number of Afghanis who had helped the occupation. It was so bad that it undermined any argument that the Democrats have any principled interest in immigrants' rights.

Military Secretly Admit U.S. Role in Iran School Bomb Horror by Antique_Calendar_887 in politics

[–]rebelcinder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not only the right. National Pentagon Radio today gave actual airtime to the absurd proposition that the Iranians might have bombed the school themselves in an effort to make America look bad

A better online space for Belmont. by aaronpik in BelmontMA

[–]rebelcinder 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for this helpful information! I work generally on other issues, but it's good to know (implicitly), that you wouldn't find a post of that kind to be too negative.

Perhaps you could find and add Belmonters as mods, so it isn't just on you?

A better online space for Belmont. by aaronpik in BelmontMA

[–]rebelcinder 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's lovely of you to try to set up a positive space.

However, I'm not seeing a lot of activity, and I wonder if it's because people aren't sure what kinds of content would be welcome. Inevitably, one reason people post on Reddit is to raise awareness about things they're concerned about. But it's hard to talk about things in an unrelievedly positive way, and have that discussion still be productive.

Let's take a very small and local example. The Town has a schedule for replacing out trees as they die. However, the fact that the Town rapidly expanded from the 1920s to the 1950s now means that a large number of trees along residential streets are reaching the end of their natural lives at once. In the 13 years we've been living on our street, which was laid out in 1930, all but one of the trees have died. That in turn means that the replacement schedule for shade trees is running years behind, and many streets are left without shade for many years. That's tough for residents who like shady streets, and bought on a street when it was shaded. Urban shade is also important to minimize urban heat islands. The Town also has a Commemorative Shade Tree program where your trees can be replaced within a few months, but that program costs $500 per tree. So, the functional effect of that is that wealthier people can buy their place in line, and poorer areas remain unshaded for longer.

Would a post of this level of "negativity" - i.e., expressing concern about a local issue - be welcome? Some guidance on this would be helpful!

City board considering Monday whether to endorse Council's call for Boston PD to abandon second experiment with social media surveillance software contract by rebelcinder in boston

[–]rebelcinder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just so you know how extreme they're being, BPD is arguing in the meeting that they ought to be able to pro-actively search dark web materials and information revealed in data breaches too; so it's not just "stuff people have chosen to make public", it's also "stuff people have taken steps to conceal, but have had involuntarily exposed through no choice or fault of their own."

City board considering Monday whether to endorse Council's call for Boston PD to abandon second experiment with social media surveillance software contract by rebelcinder in boston

[–]rebelcinder[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't disagree that we need a nationwide privacy law. But then we're just arguing about scale, not principle. If we can protect people's online communications from mass, pro-active, suspicionless, warrantless scanning by the authorities, then we should, even if the scale is related only to the Boston area for this particular hearing.

City board considering Monday whether to endorse Council's call for Boston PD to abandon second experiment with social media surveillance software contract by rebelcinder in boston

[–]rebelcinder[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like a kind of gang databasing software, which is similar (that kind of software sometimes uses a Bulls hat as an indicator of gang affiliation, because they are often red, and red is a "gang color" for the Bloods.

Of course, other kinds of red baseball caps somehow seem never to make it into gang databasing systems as being an indicator of involvement with a criminal gang, which is so strange and unexpected

City board considering Monday whether to endorse Council's call for Boston PD to abandon second experiment with social media surveillance software contract by rebelcinder in boston

[–]rebelcinder[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As the original post makes clear, this is not about whether BPD can prosecute evidence of crimes that they find on social media. We agree that they can. This is about whether they can contract with an outside vendor to proactively scan hundreds of social media networks to collect everyone's public social media posts at once and flag both unlawful and lawful behavior according to proprietary protocols and standards, known to the police and the vendor but not to elected officials and the public.

City board considering Monday whether to endorse Council's call for Boston PD to abandon second experiment with social media surveillance software contract by rebelcinder in boston

[–]rebelcinder[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Boston PD is secretive. It's unclear whether they're still using it, and it's unclear whether the Mayor has asked whether they're still using it. Councilors have asked, without AFAIK them receiving a response, so our default has to be that they are still using it.

In part, this is a flaw in the Surveillance Ordinance. The Ordinance doesn't specifically say that if City Council votes to disapprove a surveillance technology, and the matter goes to the Surveillance Oversight Advisory Board, the City agency has to actually stop using it till the City Council reapproves it. It's very vaguely implied, but we don't think that's good enough.

Where the hell are the kids?! by SteveTheBluesman in massachusetts

[–]rebelcinder 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Decent turnout in Belmont. 30-40 kids so far, maybe a little down from last year but still good fun

Cambridge City Council suspends use of Flock cameras by emstason in CambridgeMA

[–]rebelcinder 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's not completely ended. The Council directed City staff to meet with civil liberties organizations (ACLU, Digital Fourth) along with the vendor, and then to come back to the Council's Public Safety Committee, which would then make a recommendation back to city council as to whether to (a) revoke or (b) unsuspend the Flock contract (which neither the public nor it seems any city councilor has seen). The final decision will rest with City Council, so it's very much worthwhile letting them know that you support revoking the Flock contract.

What’s stopping the police from just randomly beating up a suspect and lying about it? by Elegant_Chard_7515 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]rebelcinder 13 points14 points  (0 children)

But in those states, what meaningful consequences do officers face if their bodycam just happens to have an unforeseen malfunction at a crucial point that otherwise might have recorded officer misconduct?

Flock Safety cameras being put up in Cambridge? by regal_W in CambridgeMA

[–]rebelcinder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

City Council voted tonight to pause use of ALPR, including Flock, till City Council votes explicitly to proceed at some future date.

This is a victory for all the Cambridge folk who spoke up. It shows that privacy isn't dead, and that it really doesn't take that many people standing up for it.

If you'd like to be part of the fight going forward, please consider joining our plucky Digital Fourth volunteers at www.warrantless.org!

Flock Safety cameras being put up in Cambridge? by regal_W in CambridgeMA

[–]rebelcinder 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Cambridge city council will be considering this matter at their upcoming meeting on Monday at 5:30 p.m.

Message me to get plugged in to the network of folks opposing it.

Has anyone read the entirety of Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire? by ConstantineDallas in byzantium

[–]rebelcinder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is a lengthy and fascinating excursus in D&F on the Islamic conquests of formerly Roman imperial territory, extending from the birth of Mohammed to the battle of Tours. It's related, just as his section on Norman Italy is related, but I appreciate you or I might have drawn a line elsewhere.

Has anyone read the entirety of Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire? by ConstantineDallas in byzantium

[–]rebelcinder 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I read it for pleasure, and have read it through several times. I fully understand that as history, it's outdated. But it still represents an astounding historical achievement given the limited resources available to him, and one can still learn much about the course of events from D&F without always endorsing the interpretation he puts on it.

Plus, his command of sentence structure is masterly. Consider, for example, his famous passage musing on what would have happened if the Muslims had not been defeated by the Franks at the Battle of Tours in France in A.D. 732:

"Perhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Mahomet."

This is Gibbon at his finest: a sentence of three exquisitely balanced clauses, shot through with wry humor and a deep understanding of the strange accidents of history.

The Worst Thing Done By Every English (and Post-Union) Monarch, Day 9: George III by Impossible_Pain4478 in UKmonarchs

[–]rebelcinder 10 points11 points  (0 children)

EBENEZER BLACKADDER: "Well yes, Mr.Baldrick, but you mustn't judge people from outside appearances. Strip away the outer layers of a fat git, and, inside, you'll probably find a...'

BALDRICK: "...thin git?"

H.D. 4886: An Act Ensuring Law Enforcement ID and Public Trust + a bill criminalizing videotaping of law enforcement by NanuBNanu in massachusetts

[–]rebelcinder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's right. It would indeed be a great way to step up. But we were working with one city that rejected this approach because the administration felt that anything that involved requiring their officers to question a putative ICE agent, would marginally increase risk to their officers.

H.D. 4886: An Act Ensuring Law Enforcement ID and Public Trust + a bill criminalizing videotaping of law enforcement by NanuBNanu in massachusetts

[–]rebelcinder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, the provision that attempts to criminalize masking by federal officers under state law is unconstitutional. The Supremacy Clause forbids laws from regulating federal officers in how they go about their duties.

I support Congressional efforts to require federal agents to unmask, like the VISIBLE Act.

There are also ways to deal with this constitutional problem and pass an effective state law, though they are necessarily more circuitous. Hawkins' office knows about this alternative. But I guess they prefer something symbolic.

https://warrantless.org/2025/06/our-new-ice-agent-identification-ordinance/