Recent searches
Search options
(he/him) Just read: "The sheriff said Tesla CEO Elon Musk helped the investigation by ... and giving investigators video of the suspect at charging stations along its route from Colorado to Las Vegas." And I have questions and concerns.
So ... were there any checks and balances involved? Or can Elon Musk just grab any current or past footage from the built-in cameras of any Tesla ... just like whenever he feels like it? Is there a paper trail? Is there any oversight whatsoever?
Is there any actual process at Tesla for this kind of thing? Do they need a warrant? Or is the process for pulling footage "when Elon personally asks for it?" Because that's a bad process.
Is the standard for when it's okay to pull and share video "when Elon thinks it's a good idea?" Because that's a bad standard.
The CEO of a large corporation should actually not be directly involved in these sorts of processes.
@joby yes he can. No there are no checks and balances. He's the king, he can do as he pleases.
Basically I don't care what he does to his customers. What I do care about is the collateral that gets captured by those cameras. People that have no dealings with the fash car maker, yet still end up in his video (and most likely audio) hoard. 
@fedops@fosstodon.org@joby mh, turns out the video footage was (also?) from cameras located at tesla charging stations.
Another good reason to avoid them if you don't own/use a tesla.
@fedops @joby
There's a Tesla charging station next to the route I walk to the train station every morning. I shouldn't have to plan my route to avoid it to preserve my privacy, especially because there might be other places on alternative routes that also don't respect my privacy. There should be laws covering this stuff. Nobody should get access to security camera recordings without a legal process to protect the public.
@VATVSLPR @fedops @joby My perspective is coloured by living in and around London which has cameras everywhere. When I'm out walking I consider myself in public. Though whilst my expectation of privacy is greatly reduced I do suppose that there are certain intrusions I would object to. E.g. being tracked by inaccurate facial recognition. Just being seen is not an issue. Being recorded in public is a step further but I guess something I just don't think about any more.
@TechnicalAdept @fedops @joby
Legally in the USA, there's no expectation of privacy in a public place, but we have a long legal tradition of limiting access to some information to prevent governmental, and specifically police, overreach. I don't object to the police being able to get video recordings; I object to it being up to the whims of a business owner. This should legally be a search and require safeguards like a warrant to protect against abuse.
@VATVSLPR @fedops @joby yeah that's another cultural difference. Like when the police here stop a motorist who's watched too many first amendment auditor videos on youtube and doesn't realise that the UK road traffic act has no such protection and license and registration can be demanded at a random stop with no reasonable cause required.
@TechnicalAdept @VATVSLPR @fedops @joby
This is seen a bit different in countries like Germany where the surveilance turned on the people. Doing it for safety is just fine until your government turns into less caring people.
@eq_ @TechnicalAdept @fedops @joby
Even if "the government" still has the public's best interests in mind, the system is still susceptible to abuse. Individual police officers have a history of abusing surveillance powers to stalk their exes, settle personal scores, and the like. Any system needs some kind of procedural safeguards to protect against that kind of personal misuse.