Mama told me not to come.
She said, that ain’t the way to have fun.
Here are a few options, this isn’t exhaustive:
There are lots of options here.
Us Americans fought a war over that nonsense, and it’s looking like we might need to again.
Common UK, figure it out.
Or release API documentation for the server and help the community create a replacement. Companies have options here.
SKG doesn’t specify how companies need to solve the problem, only that games need to continue to function after the company stops supporting them.
For some games (e.g. Assassin’s Creed), that could be as simple as disabling the online aspect and having a graceful fallback. For others, that could mean letting people self-host it. Or they can provide documentation for the server API and let the community build their own server. Or they can move it to a P2P connection.
Game companies have options. All SKG says is that if I’ve purchased something, I should be able to keep using it after support ends.
I’m cool with a few million. I’ll even give it back in 10 years or so.
There’s literally no reason they ever need to be masked.
Cops have rights too. If an officer wants to wear a mask, I don’t see any reason to deny them that. They must, however, identify themselves, the risk of someone pretending to be law enforcement is too great.
Police serve the public. If they are working they should all be identifiable
Agreed, I just don’t think masks are the issue here. IMO, officers involved in protest duty should have their badge number on their uniform in a big enough font for a camera to pick up. Likewise, body cameras should be on and recording the entire time.
First contact to detainment/arrest is sufficient, and police body cam footage is plenty.
And unfortunately, police can legally detain you up to 48 hours without charging you. There are rules around this, but generally speaking, police have 24 hours to prove they had probable cause and turn the detention into an arrest, otherwise they must release you.
So if police have probable cause to detain or arrest some people in a protest, they can detain far more until they can review footage to complete their investigation before deciding whether to arrest or release individuals.
I’m mostly looking for a smoking gun here. We know ICE has incorrectly arrested citizens and legal immigrants, I want to know if they have broken the law in other ways too. Arresting the wrong person is one thing, denying due process is another thing entirely.
But if you’re “arresting” a protester haven’t they become a defacto suspect?
Yes, if you’re detained or arrested, you have the right to know the name and badge number of the person detaining or arresting you.
The videos I’ve seen aren’t that, they’re merely protesters asking on behalf of someone else. If there is a video where it’s clear that someone being detained or arrested by police isn’t given that information, then I’d be very interested because that would be a pretty clear-cut 4th amendment violation.
All other law enforcment in america is maskless
SWAT wears masks.
There are only videos of people asking for badge numbers without getting a response.
Are these suspects or protestors? Because the videos I’ve seen are protestors. Police must reveal their identity to suspects due to the fourth amendment, but not to the general public.
My point is suspects have a right to know who their accusers are. Whether they share that with others (and they should) is up to them. Having the public know their identities just opens them up to vigilante justice, having suspect know their identities keeps them accountable to the rule of law.
Witnesses who are too far away to see their identification can still see their face to ID them.
Sure, I just don’t think that’s a reasonable thing to require at all times.
Instead, the public should be free to approach to a safe distance to film, and then attempt to talk with law enforcement when safe. A police officer is required to identify themselves to the suspect due to the fourth amendment. Whether they are required to identify themselves to the public is up to local law, court precedent, and agency policy.
The general public doesn’t need to be identifiable at all times like cops do.
Neither do. Police only need to be identifiable when using their authority, such as when making an arrest or dealing with protests, and in the latter case, only agency affiliation is necessary.
Including their face.
I don’t think this is necessary. What does seeing an officer’s face do that a name and badge number doesn’t? What about undercover cops? What about the winter when it’s cold?
I think it should only be required that they declare on what authority they’re acting when making official actions, like a stop, detainment, or arrest. They should give their name and badge number upon request, in a form that works for the asker (written or verbal, asker’s preference).
If we ban law enforcement from wearing masks, that opens the door to banning masks in public. I get that police should follow higher standards (I’m absolutely in favor of ending qualified immunity), but IMO the rules should merely be that police must self identify in a way the public knows they’re legitimate law enforcement when using the authority of their position.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Have you seen an instance where a citizen or legal immigrant calmly asked for name and badge number and was refused?
In practice, pretty low! In the vast majority of cases, people are released within a few hours and not sent to one of the larger detention facilities. As much as the news sensationalizes the handful of cases where that doesn’t happen, the likelihood is still quite low that I wouldn’t get due process.
If I saw an ICE operation in my neighborhood, I wouldn’t be too worried about going up to them and demanding their name and badge number. I’m not going to be “disappeared” or anything like that, especially as a US citizen. The vast majority of those targeted are actually illegal immigrants, and the extras arrested are often obstructing justice in one way or another. If I approach it completely legally, I don’t think I’d be falsely accused of something else by those officers.
Don’t get me wrong, I am 100% against what ICE is doing. I think they’re being a bit too fast and loose with their information, such that they arrest or detain far too many people without actual cause, and those they do arrest with cause they mistreat. I’m not necessarily against illegal immigrants getting deported, but that should be handled with respect and restraint, at least until we get policy to get these good people on some form of temporary status. If someone currently has work here, there should be a really easy way to get that turned into a legal work visa.
I think that privacy invading surveillance systems are primarily useful for furthering authoritarian goals, by intention or not.
And I disagree. I think this all started when we allowed things like traffic light cameras, speed cameras, and toll cameras to automatically bill based on license plate. I don’t think most would consider those to be “primarily useful for furthering authoritarian goals,” they’re merely there for routine law enforcement with specific goals.
Flock cameras are basically that same exact system, but instead of only being used when something tangible is triggered (red light, radar, or toll booth motion sensor), they passively collect information. Flock is a private company that sells its surveillance services to cities (and private orgs) to assist with tracking down license plates or alerting when there’s a gunshot detection. This is allegedly legal because you don’t have any expectation of privacy when you’re in public (hence why Ring doorbells are legal), and private companies don’t have to follow the same rules as law enforcement. I personally don’t think Flock’s founders are fascist, they seem to genuinely want to help reduce crime. I worked for a similar company that mostly did perimeter security (i.e. generally only operated on private property), and the founder was absolutely not fascist, but they did want to help reduce crime.
I personally don’t consider either of those systems fascist by nature, but they can be used to achieve fascist goals. Tracking burglars across neighborhoods doesn’t sound especially fascist to me, but tracking protestors certainly does. These are very dangerous technologies that can easily be used for fascist purposes, so I think we shouldn’t allow them to be used at all, not because they are fascist, but because they can easily be used for fascist ends just by changing conventions around its use.
I don’t think we need to label a system as authoritarian or fascist to oppose them, we just need to point out how easily they can be misused.
Every officer has a badge number that uniquely identifies then, and they are legally required to provide that information. When filing a complaint or a lawsuit, you’ll provide their name and badge number. If they refuse, you provide as much information as you can (area, time of day, type of vehicle, vehicle number, other officers and badge numbers involved, etc) so they can track the officer down.
I don’t know how ICE works specifically, but many police departments require their officers to carry business cards with that information and hand them out upon request.
Civilians have a right to verify that the people involved are actually officers and have a right to identify individual offices to report misconduct.
I don’t care if officers wear masks, I only care that they can be uniquely identified.
it can no longer be removed by legal means
It can, it just requires and act of Congress (well, two actually, impeachment and removal), an act by the VP (or maybe the cabinet? I’d need to check), or maybe an act of the Supreme Court to enable lower courts to sentence the president. None of those are currently willing to do so, but that could change after the midterms next year.
MAGA will no longer allow free elections
I guess we’ll find out next year.
I think your post is quite paranoid, but we’ll see I guess.
Eh, I’m fine with them wearing masks. I’m not fine with them breaking the law and not being accountable. If they wear masks (or even if they don’t), they need to be ready to show ID and recite their badge number.
Well, Halloween just happened, so there are probably convincing costumes available on discount. Just saying…
The intention can be fascist, sure, but that doesn’t mean the solution is fascist.
For example, I think it’s pretty clear that Lemmy was designed by tankies to create a safe space for tankies (why would the instances the main devs maintain be overly protective of China and Russia if it weren’t?), but that doesn’t make Lemmy “tankie,” it’s a software project that can be used by fascists, tankies, commies, anarchists, statists, etc, because it’s just a software program.
Likewise, a surveillance system can be used by a fascist government, private company to protect company secrets, government agency like the Pentagon for internal use, or even private individuals to ID who is at the door. It’s only fascist of it’s used to further fascist goals, like identifying minorities or protestors. But then, it’s still not the software that’s fascist, but the whole system, meaning how people use it and the policies in place.
The chance of a given piece of software being “fascist” is incredibly low, since it would need to act in a fascist way and only a fascist way, or only be useful for fascist ends. Like the fascist LLM example I gave, or a training simulator that is hard-coded to only present fascist ideology.
It’s cheaper in the long run, which is probably about 5 years, maybe less. Those fees are astronomical.
In fact, I’d be willing to donate some time to help a small business transition to Postgres.