Bytemeister

Bucees just successfully argued in court that a beaver and an alligator are visually indistinguishable to the common man...

Geofence the phone. Within 5 miles of the airport, it only shows the sanitized profile.

Outside that zone, it unlocks the encrypted data and shows you the full phone.

I've heard that is a misunderstanding. It's 100 miles from a national border or at a point of entry, not 100 miles from any point of entry. It still covers like 50% of the population though.

Here is my problem with this interpretation...

Is data property? Sure, ideas, concepts, photos, etc can be trademarked/copy-write protected and have some degree of ownership, but I'm talking at a much lower level here... Is the particular configuration of memory on your phone a piece of property? If no, then no property was destroyed by wiping the phone. All of the storage and memory is still intact and functional. If yes, then we must look further...is the position (not the switch itself) of a binary switch (like a light switch) a physical thing that you can own? Would you consider it destroyed if it was switched away from it's original position?

I don't think you could charge him with destroying property... Destruction of evidence maybe, but the property is undamaged and functioning normally.

Other arguments. The cop actually destroyed the data. Or, defendant claims he did not know the cops would use the pin to wipe the phone, and that they just wanted to know what the PIN was.

I wouldn't say there is enough evidence here to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this guy destroyed any property in response to a search. He didn't destroy anything, what was destroyed is arguably not property, and he may not be aware that his duress pin was going to be used on the device in the first place.

Then you sue them for destroying your data. They took your phone and wiped it...

*We didn't invent police abuse! We actually shined a light on it and pointed it out"

Fuck right the hell off with this shit. You don't get to sell your panopticon to a group that routinely abuses every tool they have, and feign ignorance in defense of the results.

Luckily, not all cars are made by Tesla.

Considering that the gen 1 ryzen 3 1200 (the lowest end model) is more than double the performance of the automotive processor in my car from 2023 (3.1ghz quad core vs 2.4ghz dual core)...

But, the car does do some onboard image recognition to support Hands-free driving, so there is enough compute onboard to manage that. However, avoiding objects and following a line is something you can do with a Lego mindstorm from 2000, not exactly super demanding computationally.

I reiterate, I think cars certainly have the hardware to spy on other people and drivers, but the practicality of using them for that purpose is pretty limited in regards to how much useful data you would get, how hard it is to get that data, and how much easier it is to collect better data from other sources.

Really depend on the safety tech. My partner's Honda Civic is so bad, that turning off CMBS (Collision Mitigation Braking System) and LKAS (Lane Keep Assist System) is essential to operating the car safely, as accidentally leaving these systems on has almost wrecked the car on more than one occasion. Meanwhile, the same systems on my fake Mustang work great. Sometimes backing out of the driveway, it will panic and warn me that I might crash into the ground, but it doesn't slam the brakes. The hands-free driving is actually really good, and a feature I would continue to use if it wasn't several hundred dollars a year. In comparison to Honda, Ford's safety tech is much more predictable and reliable.

This is my personal experience with two cars that I drive relatively frequently, so other people may have other opinions and experiences that are completely valid.

It's more "is it practical to access the cameras" than "can someone access the cameras".

Look at it this way... How are "they" going to access your cameras? Are they going to have a mobile broadband connection for your vehicle, and upload realtime video data from multiple cameras in real time? Maybe for one car, but to do it for every car, they would end up choking out all the cell towers in an area. What about storing your data in the car and accessing it later? Well, storage is relatively cheap, but when you add in the compute required to encode that video, and depending on how much you want to store, it could easily be a few hundred dollars to include all that, and let's face it, manufacturers want to cut costs, so who is going to pay for it? To top it off, if this repository of compute and storage existed, computer nerds would have found it and publicized it, so it seems unlikely to me that it exists for most cars. Finally, what data would "they" hope to get from real time-video of your car that is not already documented in other ways? The GPS unit can log your position and velocity with ease, your phone is an active listening device that follows you everywhere, so there are simpler and cheaper ways to get the same useful data as a realtime camera feed of the side of the road that don't involve some huge conspiracy.

Not really. Most computers are sold off a shelf at a big box store, pre-configured and ready to go. The license for windows is flashed onto the hardware, so the staff doesn't really have a way to remove it from the computer.

Hah, you think it's 15.99 a month....