Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Tuesday January 27 2015, @05:56AM   Printer-friendly
from the Not-that-NSA,-the-other-one. dept.

The US National Sheriffs' Association wants Google to block its crowd-sourced traffic app Waze from being able to report the position of police officers, saying the information is putting officer's lives at risk.

"The police community needs to coordinate an effort to have the owner, Google, act like the responsible corporate citizen they have always been and remove this feature from the application even before any litigation or statutory action," AP reports Sheriff Mike Brown, the chairman of the NSA's technology committee, told the association's winter conference in Washington.

Waze, founded in 2008 and purchased 18 months ago by Google for $1.1bn, has about 50 million users who anonymously share their locations to help gauge road traffic flows. The app also allows police reports and road closures to be added to maps and shared with other users.

Brown called the app a "police stalker," and said being able to identify where officers were located could put them at personal risk. Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, said his members had concerns as well.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/01/26/nsa_gunning_for_google_wants_copspotting_taken_off_waze_app/

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Covalent on Tuesday January 27 2015, @10:46AM

    by Covalent (43) on Tuesday January 27 2015, @10:46AM (#138492) Journal

    I like this feature because cop = traffic jam. People have to drive 2 miles per hour on the interstate to see an officer helping an old lady change a flat like it's Kim Kardashian riding an elephant or something. When I see the police icon, I don't avoid it for fear of a ticket, I just know I'm going to be sitting there for 15 extra minutes for no good reason.

    Also, radar detectors went through this same scrutiny and the 1st amendment trumps all. Sorry cops, but it's "We the people".

    --
    You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by Michael.Jackson on Tuesday January 27 2015, @12:52PM

    by Michael.Jackson (1266) on Tuesday January 27 2015, @12:52PM (#138517)

    Radar detectors are still illegal depending on which state you're driving in. I happen to live in Virginia where they are illegal.

    Related story: I used to drive a truck cross country back when the speed limits were universally 55 on all major roads. I bought a radar detector, kind of a squarish looking thing, I'm thinking it was a FuzzBuster brand but not sure. Anyway, I'm heading north on I-35 going through San Marcos, Texas, the detector is quiet, I top a hill and surprise, the lights on the waiting cruiser start twinkling, the detector never chirped once. I pull over to the shoulder, the officer parks his cruiser just to the right side of the truck cab. After exchanging pleasantries and being handed my ticket for 66 in a 55, the officer gets back in the cruiser starts to pull back on the highway. The radar detector, that heretofore silent companion, decides that right then is the time to notify me about the presence of radar and emits a warning chirp. I don't know if anyone else found it useful, but that device went out the window right then.

    • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday January 27 2015, @08:18PM

      by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday January 27 2015, @08:18PM (#138619)

      Because he couldn't possibly have figured out what your speed was without using his radar...

      --
      "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 28 2015, @12:41AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 28 2015, @12:41AM (#138698)

      In Virginia as well, nearly 40 years ago, I was on the rise of a hill on the interstate.
      The cop was on the downhill side.
      My FuzzBuster (in a kleenex box on my dash) -did- pick up his radar and I backed down my speed before he had a visual on me.
      A guy passed me and that was the guy the cop stopped.

      Regulation of radio receivers is a federal matter.
      I'm surprised this state-level prohibition hasn't been nullified by a federal court.

      -- gewg_

    • (Score: 2) by damnbunni on Wednesday January 28 2015, @10:59AM

      by damnbunni (704) on Wednesday January 28 2015, @10:59AM (#138822) Journal

      Virginia is the ONLY US state where radar detectors are still illegal.

      (They're illegal in DC as well, but that's technically not a state, so nyah.)

      They're also prohibited on military bases, but so are lots of other things.

      Virginia's ban would probably be struck down like all the other states' bans if someone bothered to fight it all the way to the top.

      Also, while the Fuzzbuster was one of the first affordable radar detectors it was also complete and total crap. To the point where when Fuzzbuster submitted one to Car and Driver for a comparison test. they took a Fuzzbuster case and put an Escort inside it because they knew the Escort was going to kick their ass.

  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday January 27 2015, @08:15PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday January 27 2015, @08:15PM (#138617)

    Which 1st Amendment right protects owning a radar detector?

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    You're not communicating with anyone...are you saying that the radar detector displaying a "cop detected" icon on the screen is considered "printing"?

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Wednesday January 28 2015, @03:13PM

      by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Wednesday January 28 2015, @03:13PM (#138902)

      Which 1st Amendment right protects owning a radar detector?

      You're picking up communications. The government also can't stop everyone from hearing something.

      And rather, where in the constitution does it give the government the power to prohibit you from owning one?

      • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday January 29 2015, @02:37AM

        by tangomargarine (667) on Thursday January 29 2015, @02:37AM (#139081)

        You're not answering the question. But we're getting into "the Constitution doesn't say anywhere that I shouldn't have the right to own nukes" territory again, and that's an argument I'd rather not have again.

        The government also can't stop everyone from hearing something.

        Legally, maybe not. Pragmatically? Sure. Ever since the Supreme Court ruled the NSA wiretapping was legal (when CLEARLY a blatant violation of the Constitution) I've lost any faith in our government abiding by its own rules. It's been too many generations since those in power actually believed in them.

        And rather, where in the constitution does it give the government the power to prohibit you from owning one?

        Well, the Constitution delegates all powers not assigned to the federal gov't to the states, so that's something right there. State government is at least closer to the people so you should in theory have more power to effect change there if you want to.

        --
        "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
        • (Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Thursday January 29 2015, @02:54AM

          by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Thursday January 29 2015, @02:54AM (#139082)

          Well, the Constitution delegates all powers not assigned to the federal gov't to the states, so that's something right there.

          That's the states, and the states are still bound by the bill of rights (and often have similar things in their constitutions). I was speaking of the federal government in that instance, but that doesn't matter since the federal government just does whatever it pleases.

  • (Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Tuesday January 27 2015, @08:47PM

    by Nobuddy (1626) on Tuesday January 27 2015, @08:47PM (#138627)

    When I rule the world, one of the laws I will put in place is simple. A rubberneck law.

    A camera with a radar gun will be put at the site of a stop or wreck. Another on the approach to grab license plates as they come/go. If the camera can see the driver's face as they pass, the driver loses their license for 6 months. If there is a gap or speed variation greater than X, each of those is another 6 months on the suspension.

    Fuck rubberneckers in the ass with a pineapple.