Ring, Google and the Police: What to Know

Ry Crist at CNET: Ring, Google and the Police: What to Know About Emergency Requests for Video Footage — The law lets Ring and Google share user footage with police during emergencies without consent and without warrants. Here’s everything you should know.

As always, the problem here is not the sharing of information with law enforcement. The problem is that users are not given any opportunity to opt-in or opt-out, and in fact, aren’t even notified clearly that this can and does happen. I have several colleagues and family members who use Ring doorbells and other Ring video devices. None of them even knew that this could happen, much less that it does happen, or that there’s nothing they can do about it.

This is precisely why I personally have steered clear of the Ring and Google ecosystems.

Others, most notably Apple, use end-to-end encryption for user video as the default setting, which blocks the company from sharing user video at all.

“HomeKit Secure Video is end-to-end encrypted, meaning even Apple cannot access it,” a company spokesperson said.

This is precisely why I opt for HomeKit Secure Video: because I own the captured video and I alone can decide what to do, or not do, with it.

by Paul on July 28, 2022 at 9:56am | Permalink
Tagged: , , | Comments Off on Ring, Google and the Police: What to Know

The more you say I can’t say something

The more you say I can’t say something, the more urgent it is for me to say it. And it has nothing to do with what you’re saying I can’t say. It has everything to do with my right — my freedom — of artistic expression. That is valuable to me. That is not separate from me. It’s worth protecting for me, and it’s worth protecting for everyone else who endeavors in our noble, noble professions.

— Dave Chappelle1, What’s in a Name: Speech at Duke Ellington School of the Arts (Netflix 2022) at 32:22.

Dave Chappelle gets it. I wish more people also got it.

You know, rights are like muscles in the sense that if they’re never exercised, they atrophy and wither and become useless.

Thankfully, Dave Chappelle2 is willing to exercise for us, that thing that he calls his freedom of artistic expression, which is what the rest of us would call our Freedom of Speech.

yeah, in a minute…
1 Dave Chappelle is the recipient of the 2019 Mark Twain Prize for American Humor.
2 And not just Dave Chappelle, there are others, many of whom are also comedians, but not all, who are willing to exercise this right for us.
by Paul on July 17, 2022 at 10:20am | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on The more you say I can’t say something

What is the answer to 99 out of 100 questions?

My father wrote about this in his book. Chapter 1… Page 1… Paragraph 1: What is the answer to 99 out of 100 questions?

Money.

— Tom Cruise as David Aames, Vanilla Sky (R 2001).

by Paul on July 15, 2022 at 8:37pm | Permalink
Tagged: , , | Comments Off on What is the answer to 99 out of 100 questions?

R.I.P. James Caan

James Caan, the tough-guy actor who scored an Oscar nom as mafioso Sonny Corleone in The Godfather and an Emmy nom for playing NFL running back Brian Piccolo in Brian’s Song, among a host of big film and TV roles including Elf and Las Vegas, died Wednesday night in Los Angeles. He was 82. His family confirmed the news on Caan’s Twitter page but gave no other details.

by Paul on July 7, 2022 at 12:28pm | Permalink
Tagged: | Comments Off on R.I.P. James Caan

If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case…

But that is all I would say, out of adherence to a simple yet fundamental principle of judicial restraint: If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case, then it is necessary not to decide more.

— Chief Justice John Roberts, concurring in judgment, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U. S. ____ (2022).

Jacob Sullum, writing at Reason, “John Roberts and the Path SCOTUS Did Not Take on Abortion”:

Roberts’ partial concurrence argues that the majority violated “a simple yet fundamental principle of judicial restraint” by going further than was necessary to resolve the case. He notes that Mississippi initially said the Court could uphold its law without completely renouncing the right to abortion identified in Roe and upheld in Casey. That position is reflected in the way the state framed the main question for the Court when it sought review of the 5th Circuit decision rejecting the 15-week ban: “whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.”

After the Court agreed to hear the case, however, Mississippi broadened its argument, urging the justices to hold that the Constitution does not protect a right to abortion at all. “The Court now rewards that gambit,” Roberts writes, “noting three times that the parties presented ‘no half-measures’ and argued that ‘we must either reaffirm or overrule Roe and Casey.'” As Roberts sees it, the Court should have stuck with the question as originally presented. “If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case,” he says, “then it is necessary not to decide more.”

by Paul on June 27, 2022 at 5:02pm | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on If it is not necessary to decide more to dispose of a case…

This conservative mindset is at odds with constitutional text and history

Damon Root writing at Reason, “Alito’s Abortion Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to the 9th Amendment: The Constitution protects many more rights than it mentions, as James Madison explained.”:

[…]For Alito and the many legal conservatives who think like him, unenumerated constitutional rights are inherently suspect. When a court recognizes an unenumerated right, these conservatives say, that court is almost certainly guilty of judicial activism.

But this conservative mindset is at odds with constitutional text and history, both of which make clear that unenumerated rights are entitled to the same respect as the small handful of rights that the Constitution specifically lists.

Exactly.

by Paul on June 25, 2022 at 10:38am | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on This conservative mindset is at odds with constitutional text and history

No one should get used to their rights

Mary Ziegler writing at The Atlantic, “If the Supreme Court Can Reverse Roe, It Can Reverse Anything”:

If this decision signals anything bigger than its direct consequences, it is this: No one should get used to their rights. Predicting with certainty which ones, if any, will go, or when, is impossible. But Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is a stark reminder that this can happen. Rights can vanish. The majority wants us to think otherwise.

Indeed.

But until recently, there were limits on what the Court would do. Historically, the justices seemed reluctant to do anything too radical, lest they cause a backlash that damaged the power and prestige of the institution.

One might have expected any such guardrails to be particularly effective at protecting Roe, the best-known of any Supreme Court decision, and one that many Americans seem to support. The Dobbs decision makes plain that those limits are gone. In their place is a kind of constitutional partisanship, dictated by the interpretive philosophies and political priors of whoever currently has a majority on the Court and nothing more.

Judicial activism, plain and simple. Of course, I doubt you’ll hear any “so-called Conservatives”1 complaining — they only complain about judicial activism when the ruling is one they disagree with… in other words, hypocrisy.

yeah, in a minute…
1 For more on “so-called Conservatives” and what Conservatism actually is, see: On Conservatives and Conservatism.
by Paul on June 25, 2022 at 10:33am | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on No one should get used to their rights

The Attempted Coup of 6 January 2021

For half a century, Republican and “so-called Conservative”1 apologists have been trying to find someting — anything — to minimize Watergate — a shocking and atrocious situation in which the sitting President of the United States conspired — in the Oval Office — to commit a felony, and then further conspired — in the Oval Office — to cover it up. Unfortunately for them, the only event in half a century that even comes close to minimizing the utter disgust of Watergate has been the fucking attempted coup of 6 January 2021.

The information coming out — from the former President’s own people — is utterly damning. It’s impossible to look at this information critically, skeptically, without reaching the undeniable conclusion that the shameful events of 6 January 2021 were, in fact, and attempted coup d’état. Sad.

In the future, the great United States of America will be spoken of like some piss-poor Southern American country where coups happen all the time. What a legacy.

yeah, in a minute…
1 For more on “so-called Conservatives” and what Conservatism actually is, see: On Conservatives and Conservatism.
by Paul on June 10, 2022 at 12:44pm | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on The Attempted Coup of 6 January 2021

The religious factions that are growing throughout our land…

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in “A,” “B,” “C” and “D.” Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of “conservatism.”
[emphasis added]

• Senator Barry Goldwater, Five-term U.S. Senator and Hero of American Conservatism (Speech in the U.S. Senate, September 16, 1981).

by Paul on June 9, 2022 at 8:01am | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on The religious factions that are growing throughout our land…

Wait a minute

Tom: “…cracker-ass, fruity-booty, wack as hell, weak sauce, fuckhead, fuckface, fucknuts, shit nuts, shit fuck, fuck fuck–”

Gene: “Wait a minute, somebody called me a ‘fuck fuck’?”

Tom: “Yeah. Rob Reiner, 1994. Was the ‘Ghosts of Mississippi’ audition. I specifically said I don’t want feedback.”

— Fred Melamed as Tom Possoro and Henry Winkler as Gene Cousineau, Barry S3E4 “all the sauces” (HBO 2022).

by Paul on May 20, 2022 at 3:39pm | Permalink
Tagged: , , , | Comments Off on Wait a minute