IOW there are plenty in the government who don’t want citizens to have access to information about what they’re doing in government, but they’re quite happy to try to make more legislation giving them rights or backdoor access to citizens’ information.
DJI drones and the surveillance technology on board these systems are collecting vast amounts of
sensitive data—everything from high-resolution images of critical infrastructure to facial recognition
technology and remote sensors that can measure an individual’s body temperature and heart rate,”
Commissioner Carr stated. “Security researchers have also found that DJI’s software applications collect large quantities of personal information from the operator’s smartphone that could be exploited by
Beijing. Indeed, one former Pentagon official stated that ‘we know that a lot of the information is sent
back to China from’ DJI drones.
“DJI’s collection of vast troves of sensitive data isespecially troubling given that China’s National
Intelligence Law grants the Chinese government the power to compel DJI to assist it in espionage
activities. In fact, the Commerce Department placed DJI on its Entity List last year, citing DJI’s role in
Communist China’s surveillance and abuse of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Add to this information the
widespread use of DJI drones by various state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies as
well as news reports that the U.S. Secret Service and FBI recently bought DJI drones, and the need for
quick action on the potential national security threat is clear.
And many, many mobile apps out there, except this one is the bad one, because: China.
My point is that meaningful privacy legislation would stop all apps from doing this with our data, but we have legislators who only pretend to care if a bogeyman has access to the data, and forget the part where any adversary could simply buy the data on the open data market.
I’m personally less interested in China having access to my daily movements than I am my own government, which includes states that are trying to criminalize going to certain medical providers.
I’d prefer if nobody had access, but I can see through the charade. These legislators are invested in technology that competes with China, and that collect and sell our data, so they prefer to keep things the way they are and pick winners and losers.
Dumb.
“We are too corrupt to draft meaningful privacy legislation, but watch as we pretend CCP is the real problem.”
Performative BS
Same thing with TikTok
They want privacy from us but not privacy for us.
IOW there are plenty in the government who don’t want citizens to have access to information about what they’re doing in government, but they’re quite happy to try to make more legislation giving them rights or backdoor access to citizens’ information.
They’re the Boogeyman of the decade.
From the FCC.
Great context and important to see. I hadn’t thought about the tons of minable data from the drone’s video and GPS data alone.
And many, many mobile apps out there, except this one is the bad one, because: China.
My point is that meaningful privacy legislation would stop all apps from doing this with our data, but we have legislators who only pretend to care if a bogeyman has access to the data, and forget the part where any adversary could simply buy the data on the open data market.
I’m personally less interested in China having access to my daily movements than I am my own government, which includes states that are trying to criminalize going to certain medical providers.
I’d prefer if nobody had access, but I can see through the charade. These legislators are invested in technology that competes with China, and that collect and sell our data, so they prefer to keep things the way they are and pick winners and losers.