all 84 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 158 points 4 months ago (4 children)

How many criminals are taking along their microchipped pets to and from their crimes?

Rhetorical question I know. They simply do not want to allow dissidents and undesirables the freedom of movement.

Also, if you contribute to a project like this, you are a traitor and should be treated as such.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    How are they going to read pet microchips? They're not broadcasting a signal constantly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    They're not. Pet RFID chips are low frequency and have a read range of a few inches at most. By the time you pump enough energy in to get a signal a foot away, you've probably microwaved the pet and blown out the chip antenna.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    I, like most people, didn't read the article. However, a lot of people use tracking tags on their pets collar so they can actually be tracked if they get out. I'm guessing that is what these cameras will be picking up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 70 points 4 months ago

    If they track all that other stuff then they are not 'license plate cameras'.

  • source
  • [+] 68 points 4 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    There was some politician talking about how Section 702 is expiring on Pod Save America and he goes on explaining why it's so great and needed and then one of his selling points is that there is a carve out for politicians and I couldn't be more enraged when I heard that. Like I get the point he is making, but if politicians are above the law why would they care about the laws they are writing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Normal citizens can do this to police.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I’m pretty sure if you follow a cop with a drone camera they are going to find a way to charge you with something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    License plate cameras will soon discover rapid unscheduled disassembly

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    What's the point of even having the 4th Amendment when corporations can completely sidestep it and tell the government exactly what you're doing all the time? Corporations and the government are essentially the same entity with this massive loophole.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    ... pet microchips are passive LF RFID tags, they have a readable range of maybe 15cm? Unless they've figured out some way to power them at distance (or they're sticking UHF tags in your dogs, which they arent) without frying the camera and giving everyone cancer, they're inert. What weird marketing hype.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Industry researchers have managed to create directional antennas that read 125 kHz chips (the kind used in pets) from as far away as one meter. That's most or all of the width of a sidewalk, if the reader is placed at ground level.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    For unimplanted tags of unspecified size sure it's technically possible to do, but I'll let the article summarize why this is blatant marketing hype:

    The ideal lab setup often fails miserably once you mount the reader near a gate or machine frame.

    It’s worth saying: 1 meter is an ambitious goal for 125kHz. LF systems are intentionally short-range to prevent cross-talk. If you truly need 1-meter coverage, sometimes the real solution isn’t to push more current — it’s to rethink geometry, use multi-coil zones, or explore hybrid systems (LF for identity, HF/UHF for distance).

    and then mention that the interference from the dermis vastly reduces the useful range of the tags, and that the article doesn't actually specify what type of tag they're designing for (or if it's using a set orientation...).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Maybe time to start creating devices that spam various Bluetooth MACs and just leave them around... Raise the noise floor a bit

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Nah, too easy to filter. Make them clone MACs they've seen, and simulate trips around the city.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Is this concept viable? Interesting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    Small single board computer with a solar battery could spam fake bluetooth MACs all day and night. You would need additional hardware to fake the 4G signals (and this would be illegal) or things in the unlicensed bands like tire pressure monitor sensors.

    Your setup would cost about as much as theirs and they have infinity money, so absent some rich sponsor you'd be limited to screwing with a few nodes. A more effective use of battery power would be an angle grinder (this would also be illegal).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    This is how you make tech enthusiasts hate tech.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Or motivate them to tactically acquire new hardware.

    The elites don't want you to know this but the cameras in the park are free, you can take them home.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I had heard previously that shining multiple laser pointers at a camera will break it. Just a thought.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    How powerful do we need to get for that. It'd be a clean way to work on the issue. You'll need to be in line of sight though i imagine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago*

    We got into this in detail on other social media. Some camera types are more susceptible, but the more powerful lasers are dangerous as shit , that could take out any camera. You need eye protection, and welding goggles might not do it because it's different wavelengths. I'm not a technical guy so I can't say precisely.

    But the regular laser pointers can take out some cameras.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Whenever a leftist talks about technofascism and technofeudalism, this is that.

    Ignore them and let big brother watch you, citizen. Being adversarial to the safety that monitoring provides would be far too political for your centrist, apolotical heart. Just accept that this is the price of safety and work hard and have kids. Take the blue pill.

    Or you can take the red pill, and free your mind.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    I am on nextdoor and at least once a week there's a post about Seattle's mayor turning off the flock cameras and it's inevitably flooded by Republicans screaming and shouting that she wants there to be more murder. These people have no critical thinking skills and just parrot anything whatever media station they chose says.

    They always disappear when I point out the cameras have been hacked, Leo's nationwide can access, they've been caught stalking with the cameras, they can listen in on conversations through a cracked window, and we have no guarantees the data won't be fed to AI. Guess I can add precise location tracking through phones to the list too.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    ghost in the shell laughing man shit.

    a couple years go by and they don't know how to track people regularly anymore.

    so if we bypass these sensors and algorithms, we become invisible in plain sight

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 12 points 4 months ago (5 children)
  • [+] 4 points 4 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 21 points 4 months ago

    One of the reasons 80s tech is making a comeback.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I'd be a shame if someone hid an ESP32 nearby randomly broadcasting previously detected MAC addresses.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago

    Despite doing an awful lot with ESP32s, Home assistant, and a bunch of LoRa stuff, I know very little about BLE. Would it be possible for folks to voluntarily add their MAC to a data base on gitlab, and have a ESP32 program that:

    1. Spammed out whatever the max reasonable number of random entries from that database is
    2. Updated it every-time it was on a specified WiFi So that every time I drove by one of these, not only do I look like a spacehulk of TPS, headphones, cars and cellphones, but I'm specifically helping someone appear somewhere not their location as well?
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Thinking in terms of database management systems I would think these systems collect enough unique info that they probably can use 'composite-keys' to sort through collected content. If thats the case then they can probably filter out all of those fake MAC addresses with relative ease, but I like where your head is at.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    hide your devices in a faraday cage X

    Drive around with a machine with 20k reprogrammable-MAC bluetooth radios that randomize the MAC address every 10 seconds ✓

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago

    Ya know, thats a good idea. I would make the time frame shorter depending on what the range of the transmitter is. If you switch while in range of the camera would it pick you up as two vehicles?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago

    Mass surveillance by corporation

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago

    We have to quit these corporate electronics.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago

    Enshittification of society itself

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Brb making RF insulated glove boxes.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Could one build a device that could overload these with fake data?

    Or should we just use cordless angle grinders?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I don't know anything about jamming these but I do know that DeWalt makes a pretty good cordless angle grinder

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    Its funnier than that, jammers are not legal, but data poisioning is. Leave a device near by that just rotates through IDs of all the signal types you know its listening for and it protects everyone passing by because their UIDs get lost in the noise.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Does GDPR protect Europeans from this kind of boring surveillance dystopia?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    IANAL but it does have a bunch of exceptions allowing governments to do whatever they want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Kill the rich, save the poor. Taxation, is not enough for the current era. There must be justice for the crimes committed. Once they are dead, then we can figure out how to run the world without capitalism. Untill then, the elimination of the ultra-rich by any means should be the goal. Everything else is noise.

    In addition: We have the power. The US power grid is fragile. As such if we all turn off our power at the exact same time, we can cripple the grid. On July 4th at 11pm cst exactly, we can all power down our homes. Even if only 50% do it, it will enough. We have the power, and we will stop these monsters by any means necessary!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago
    [–] 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    looks like all those phones with physical shutoff switches are looking pretty fuckin good now.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    I hope for a horrible end for whatever piece of shit decided to track pets. A curb stomping would be too kind for that kind of trash.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago*

    The more of you that is digital, the more of you they will see. Their ignorance of your life is a critical protection for you, from them.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    This AI bubble is gonna crash so hard, none of this processing is sustainable and profitable.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago

    Jokes on you. I leave all my electronics at home. Fuck having a digital leash, especially one that can be tracked.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    I'm ready to just let the rich roll over us at this point.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Just add water.

  • source