If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. But talk very quietly under the street lights just in case   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 38
    More: Asinine, Homeland Securities  
•       •       •

11875 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Nov 2013 at 6:31 PM (23 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



38 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-10 06:34:18 PM
You have been fined one credit for violating the verbal morality statue.
 
2013-11-10 06:38:55 PM
Streetlight cameras wooo ahhh aaaa
 
2013-11-10 06:41:59 PM
Glad to see that indiscriminate surveillance is only occurring in Las Vegas.
 
2013-11-10 06:46:28 PM
not worried about hackers  due to encryption?  its not like hackers are good at breaking that or anything.....
 
2013-11-10 06:47:29 PM
Reasonable expectation of privacy != public streets.
 
2013-11-10 06:49:08 PM

Snapper Carr: Reasonable expectation of privacy != public streets.


Then it should be no big deal if I set up a bunch of these on private property adjacent to where police like to hang out?
 
2013-11-10 06:54:43 PM
Seems funny coming from Vegas seeing as the casino's have cameras covering every square inch of the casino floor, hallways, elevators, basically everything but the guest rooms.
 
2013-11-10 06:57:02 PM

ReapTheChaos: Seems funny coming from Vegas seeing as the casino's have cameras covering every square inch of the casino floor, hallways, elevators, basically everything but the guest rooms.


Few of them are known to record audio.
 
2013-11-10 06:59:05 PM

pedrop357: ReapTheChaos: Seems funny coming from Vegas seeing as the casino's have cameras covering every square inch of the casino floor, hallways, elevators, basically everything but the guest rooms.

Few of them are known to record audio.


It's actually illegal for them to do so, as it becomes wiretapping territory and you have to have a warrant or very special circumstances (which vary by state).
 
2013-11-10 07:04:03 PM

ReapTheChaos: Seems funny coming from Vegas seeing as the casino's have cameras covering every square inch of the casino floor, hallways, elevators, basically everything but the guest rooms.


A - The casino cameras are run by the casinos, not the government
B - Those cameras are meant to follow the money moreso than to conduct surveillance upon the people (i.e. they'll keep an eye on you if you try to skim a few chips but won't care too much if you show someone a bit of video you took at a baseball game without the express written consent of Major League Baseball, and they're more likely to follow you if you use a bit of sleight-of-hand to cheat at the poker table than if you fart in an elevator and pretend it wasn't you)
 
2013-11-10 07:12:04 PM

Kahabut: It's actually illegal for them to do so, as it becomes wiretapping territory and you have to have a warrant or very special circumstances (which vary by state).


Since it's private property, the casinos don't need a search warrant to take video and audio recordings of people in publicly accessible areas of the casino. All they need is a sign on the front door that says something like "Hey, there's security cameras here and by entering the casino you consent to being recorded everywhere in the building you go except restrooms and hotel rooms" and they're covered.
 
2013-11-10 07:19:47 PM
Do citizens get to listen to the tapes?  Sooner or later a politician is going to say something incriminating next to one and then get butt hurt that the recording gets loose.
 
2013-11-10 07:21:13 PM

Knight of the Woeful Countenance: You have been fined one credit for violating the verbal morality statue.


And people think I'm crazy for wanting at least a long stone's throw between my house and the next...
 
2013-11-10 07:21:24 PM
Meh, it's not like everyone with a phone isn't going to take pics/video of their own drunk asses........or some one else's drunk ass, and load it up on twitter or facebook anyway.
 
2013-11-10 07:26:38 PM
Well, unless you go to the Big MT and you have to deal with all the farking lobotomites and roboscorpions. Oh, and the gottverdammt skeletons in the trauma suits with the plasma rifles. Those are best handled with either the anti-materiel rifle loaded with explosive rounds or a grenade launcher. Hate those farking things, always ganging up on you.
 
2013-11-10 07:27:42 PM

King Something: Kahabut: It's actually illegal for them to do so, as it becomes wiretapping territory and you have to have a warrant or very special circumstances (which vary by state).

Since it's private property, the casinos don't need a search warrant to take video and audio recordings of people in publicly accessible areas of the casino. All they need is a sign on the front door that says something like "Hey, there's security cameras here and by entering the casino you consent to being recorded everywhere in the building you go except restrooms and hotel rooms" and they're covered.


That may or may not be true in vegas, but I can assure you that it isn't true in any west coast state.

Video, yes.  Audio... nope.
 
2013-11-10 07:27:49 PM

King Something: Kahabut: It's actually illegal for them to do so, as it becomes wiretapping territory and you have to have a warrant or very special circumstances (which vary by state).

Since it's private property, the casinos don't need a search warrant to take video and audio recordings of people in publicly accessible areas of the casino. All they need is a sign on the front door that says something like "Hey, there's security cameras here and by entering the casino you consent to being recorded everywhere in the building you go except restrooms and hotel rooms" and they're covered.


They are also not interested other "illegal" activity that doesn't concern them. Like the girls doing business at the bar.
 
2013-11-10 07:29:46 PM
Meh. LA had these first.

www.theendisnigel.com
 
2013-11-10 07:36:15 PM
It's all fine only of we can end all the fantasy b.s. about the u.s.

Call it what it is. Its authoritarian. It's a fascism. It isn't democracy. It isn't a representative republic.
It isn't the land of the free.
 
2013-11-10 07:37:13 PM

Kahabut: King Something: Kahabut: It's actually illegal for them to do so, as it becomes wiretapping territory and you have to have a warrant or very special circumstances (which vary by state).

Since it's private property, the casinos don't need a search warrant to take video and audio recordings of people in publicly accessible areas of the casino. All they need is a sign on the front door that says something like "Hey, there's security cameras here and by entering the casino you consent to being recorded everywhere in the building you go except restrooms and hotel rooms" and they're covered.

That may or may not be true in vegas, but I can assure you that it isn't true in any west coast state.

Video, yes.  Audio... nope.


Weird, because anyone can wiretap their own phones, they just can't wiretap someone else's phone.  Also, there would be a lot of parents in trouble for nanny cams then.  Oh, and not to mention all those World's Dumbest Criminals videos of convenient store robberies, many of those have audio.
 
2013-11-10 07:44:31 PM

lack of warmth: Weird, because anyone can wiretap their own phones, they just can't wiretap someone else's phone. Also, there would be a lot of parents in trouble for nanny cams then. Oh, and not to mention all those World's Dumbest Criminals videos of convenient store robberies, many of those have audio.


You're not allowed to record audio on someone without their consent. If you tell them ahead of time so they can decide not to proceed with the conversation, you've met the requirement. Many stories meet the requirement with a sign that says they have audio and video surveillance. Pretty much all call centers lead each call with a message saying the call is being recorded, so you can decide to hang up.
 
2013-11-10 07:45:29 PM

pedrop357: Snapper Carr: Reasonable expectation of privacy != public streets.

Then it should be no big deal if I set up a bunch of these on private property adjacent to where police like to hang out?


You see the stupidity of your comment now, I hope.

Public streets != private property.

That help?
 
2013-11-10 07:50:17 PM

Towermonkey: Well, unless you go to the Big MT and you have to deal with all the farking lobotomites and roboscorpions. Oh, and the gottverdammt skeletons in the trauma suits with the plasma rifles. Those are best handled with either the anti-materiel rifle loaded with explosive rounds or a grenade launcher. Hate those farking things, always ganging up on you.


Maybe that's why the lights are out; someone mis-wired the mics.

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-11-10 07:52:42 PM

ArcadianRefugee: pedrop357: Snapper Carr: Reasonable expectation of privacy != public streets.

Then it should be no big deal if I set up a bunch of these on private property adjacent to where police like to hang out?

You see the stupidity of your comment now, I hope.

Public streets != private property.

That help?


fark off.

If there's no privacy expectation on public streets, then it should be no big deal if I set up cameras on private property immediately adjacent to those public streets in order to record the conversations of those who pass by, OR set up them immediately adjacent to places where police frequent eg., coffee shops, donut shops, etc.

The idea that we have no privacy expectations on public streets is absurd on its face and would be shown to be a farce if it were government agents continuously recorded on those streets.
 
2013-11-10 08:03:56 PM
They are just wanting some video of politicians looking for hookers and blow. It's a bipartisan thing? Boobs are boobs.
 
2013-11-10 08:07:29 PM

King Something: than if you fart in an elevator and pretend it wasn't you)


Oh thank God for that. It's one of the best things to do to drunk folks.
 
2013-11-10 08:11:32 PM

HotWingAgenda: lack of warmth: Weird, because anyone can wiretap their own phones, they just can't wiretap someone else's phone. Also, there would be a lot of parents in trouble for nanny cams then. Oh, and not to mention all those World's Dumbest Criminals videos of convenient store robberies, many of those have audio.

You're not allowed to record audio on someone without their consent. If you tell them ahead of time so they can decide not to proceed with the conversation, you've met the requirement. Many stories meet the requirement with a sign that says they have audio and video surveillance. Pretty much all call centers lead each call with a message saying the call is being recorded, so you can decide to hang up.


That is only law in 12 states, the other 38 states and federal only require one person involved to know the conversation is recorded.  Companies operating nationally do it to protect their behinds.

/MI has something on this, but once again MI law language is pointless and not really enforceable
//you might want to check to see where your state stands.
 
2013-11-10 08:17:53 PM
If you're doing nothing wrong, then you should just let me watch you shower.
 
2013-11-10 08:26:33 PM

Begoggle: If you're doing nothing wrong, then you should just let me watch you shower.


People shower in the street?
 
2013-11-10 08:38:53 PM

pedrop357: ArcadianRefugee: pedrop357: Snapper Carr: Reasonable expectation of privacy != public streets.

Then it should be no big deal if I set up a bunch of these on private property adjacent to where police like to hang out?

You see the stupidity of your comment now, I hope.

Public streets != private property.

That help?

fark off.

If there's no privacy expectation on public streets, then it should be no big deal if I set up cameras on private property immediately adjacent to those public streets in order to record the conversations of those who pass by, OR set up them immediately adjacent to places where police frequent eg., coffee shops, donut shops, etc.

The idea that we have no privacy expectations on public streets is absurd on its face and would be shown to be a farce if it were government agents continuously recorded on those streets.


Well, if it is your private property, no, I don't think is would be a problem.* Anyway, my apologies: I missed the "adjacent" in your earlier comment.

That said, you [legally] enjoy little expectation of privacy when in public.**

* ignoring local wiretapping laws that are being misused everywhere, etc
** "No" expectation is an obvious misstatement as well
 
2013-11-10 08:40:41 PM
Maybe they could use the cameras to crack down on those jackasses handing out cards for strip clubs or whatever on the strip.
 
2013-11-10 09:28:39 PM

pedrop357: ArcadianRefugee: pedrop357: Snapper Carr: Reasonable expectation of privacy != public streets.

Then it should be no big deal if I set up a bunch of these on private property adjacent to where police like to hang out?

You see the stupidity of your comment now, I hope.

Public streets != private property.

That help?

fark off.

If there's no privacy expectation on public streets, then it should be no big deal if I set up cameras on private property immediately adjacent to those public streets in order to record the conversations of those who pass by, OR set up them immediately adjacent to places where police frequent eg., coffee shops, donut shops, etc.

The idea that we have no privacy expectations on public streets is absurd on its face and would be shown to be a farce if it were government agents continuously recorded on those streets.


Dunkin doughnuts has cameras at many of their locations, wtf is your point?
 
2013-11-10 10:14:56 PM
pixcdn.posterrevolution.com
 
2013-11-10 11:25:37 PM

Your Hind Brain: Begoggle: If you're doing nothing wrong, then you should just let me watch you shower.

People shower in the street?


How did you know about my dream?? Aaaaggghhh! *runs screaming*

/not really
//bored
 
2013-11-11 12:25:14 AM
"Some worry this is yet another attempt by authorities to potentially invade the public's privacy. "
"...public's privacy. "
"...public..."

You're in public, assume you're always being watched or recorded.
 
2013-11-11 02:24:36 AM
That town is filled with so many ham-head tourists there can't possibly be anything to gain by recording their shiatty little conversations.
 
2013-11-11 08:26:47 AM
So are the lip readers out of work now?

i1.ytimg.com
 
2013-11-11 09:30:13 AM

chitownmike: Dunkin doughnuts has cameras at many of their locations, wtf is your point?


Are they recording audio?
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report