this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
504 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

59322 readers
4980 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How about both? The governmental systems are supposed to be open so that they can be observed to be truthful and trustworthy, and then keep checking anyways.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think things like names of suspects or victims should be made public.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The American legal system has made a conscious decision to require public trials (so accused are public) with the right to face your accuser (so victims are public). This does remove privacy, but the idea is that the trade off is worth it to avoid people being "convinced" in secret trials.

You may disagree with this trade off, but it's baked in and changing it would be a big difference. Some exceptions exist, I think, but IANAL.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Obviously nobody should disappear into secret jails, but victims and witnesses are not on trial, and should have their privacy protected.

Having random people listening to police comms is no substitute for a competent regulator.