wsj.com
www.wsj.com
  • Zedstrian@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    20·
    15 days ago

    “I don’t want to be in a situation where these tech companies, a handful of tech companies, know everything about you and know where you’re going,” he said. “And I know they collect a lot as it is, but I think it’s going to get a lot worse unless we have some protections for the people in Florida.”

    As expected, he’s redirecting public anger away from root problem (police overreach) towards the strawman issue of ‘tech companies’ (tech company data collection is an entirely separate issue). Restrictions on what Flock can or can’t do don’t mean anything if police departments aren’t stopped from putting up dozens and dozens of interconnected, AI-powered cameras in their cities that by design collect data on every individual that passes by.

    • nymnympseudonym@piefed.socialEnglish
      7·
      15 days ago

      tech company data collection is an entirely separate issue

      This is a really important point I wish more people appreciated.

      It’s not a matter of one is worse so the other is not bad.

      After the Nazi occupation, France, the Netherlands, and reconstructed Germany itself all either removed sensitive data from state databases, or dismantled & federated the databases themselves. The State needs information about the population in order to be useful.

      Much like with private companies, the State should be given the minimum power/info necessary to do its job. Many of the hoops that make it less efficient, also make it less easy to abuse.