patrick.net

I've been fearing this. A camera at every intersection - nationwide tracking grid.

They will demonstrate to us how by looking at our driving habits and locations, how they turn a typical traffic stop into a drug bust, or recovery of an abducted child. People will cheer, and argue in favor of expanding their surveillance and monitoring.

Soon, a typical police stop will involve you explaining to them why you go to such and such neighborhood in the evenings etc...

Although, our cell phones already track us even better. But, they don't have easy access to that data. They will get it from traffic cams instead.

Since Google maps has the BEST location db on us all by FAR - do you think they've already started using machine learning and AI on our location histories to identify and predict things? Can they tell who likely uses drugs, maybe by identifying certain "high traffic" residential homes, where people visit for 2 minutes at a time? Or people who frequent night clubs? Maybe cross ref it with social media info?

You know, it's easy to identify friends, or acquaintances, just via location history of google maps. If they see that you have been at the same time + loc as some other person more than once, especially if you then travel together, it's pretty likely you know that person, or are friends. They can easily identify public places, such as schools, and discard data from those locations which would lead to false positives. I know this because I did this as a project in college - microsoft gave me an annoymized location db (lat, lon, timestamp, userid), and also a corresponding social network db. I was able to use purely the location lat/lon + timestamp data to predict whether or not they were friends on the social network w/ almost 90% accuracy. Imagine what Google could do.

This is why you should register your vehicle under an LLC that doesn't trace back to you. And avoid living in large cities with lots of cameras.

NuttBoxer says

This is why you should register your vehicle under an LLC that doesn't trace back to you. And avoid living in large cities with lots of cameras.

Or ride your bicycle.

My municipality has done away with parking stickers and is now using ALPRs for digital chalking to enforce it's residential parking permit program.

NuttBoxer says

This is why you should register your vehicle under an LLC that doesn't trace back to you. And avoid living in large cities with lots of cameras.

In a different, preferably non-neighboring state.

You all do know an LLC does dick for you, right? Just because the acronym stands for limited liability does not mean you cannot be tracked through it. In some cases it's a shield/umbrella to protect personal assets from lawsuits, but by no means does it prevent police, FBI, etc. from tracking individuals who are involved or part of the LLC.

The SOS has all the LLC info and your driver license and registration info, you don't think they've got the info linked in a database? Or share data with other states or government entities? lol. And good luck with any out of state scam. If you think some random is going to obstruct justice and not release your info, you're mistaken.

Regardless of any technology now or 200 years ago, this idea you can skirt under the radar for any reason is a joke. The only way to be 100% undetectable is to never buy anything, live in the woods and never let anyone ever see you. Good luck with that. That fact you're even alive and using this site leaves dozens of trails back to you. Your minds will be blown with the coming facial recognition if you think this license plate story is even the tip of the iceberg. They've been able to do this since the late 90's with the license plate tracking for those of us in toll road states.

As I've said before here, if I have only your name or address (even old), I'll find you (that's not a threat, just reality of information available now). Unfortunately, unless you're almost dead, privacy and protecting identity has been gone since the late 90's and early 2000's. Almost any identity protection outside of locking up you SS# is a scam/marketing ploy.

WookieMan says

The SOS has all the LLC info and your driver license and registration info

This is patently false, and woefully uninformed:

"Privacy – New Mexico is the only state that does not ask for and does not publish the owner of the LLC. Every other state will require your name. Only holding an asset in a New Mexico LLCs will prevent anyone from tracing ownership to you. Plus, you can use the New Mexico LLC to pay for utilities, phone, internet or other services that you don't want traced to your name."
http://www.howtovanish.com/why-an-asset-protection-attorney-loves-new-mexico-llc-registration/

CornPoptheOriginalGangster says

In a different, preferably non-neighboring state.

Depends on their LLC laws.

OK I will make the case for it not being the worst thing. I mean if you want to go somewhere without being traced, then don't use your registered car, use another means of transportation. There's probably worry somebody could spoof your plate but then they also would need the exact make and model of the car in the same condition, and then you still have your cell phone data to prove you weren't in the care if someone stole it. Generally if you don't live off the grid LEOs can find out where you are almost any time. There have been numerous cases in the recent years though where a digital tracker, e.g. fitness, phone etc. was used to prove the defendants innocence and spared them potential jail time. I do think you should have privacy wrt LLCs and where you live etc., but if you drive a vehicle that needs to be registered then you should assume they can find out where you are. The thing is a malicious government, be it modern globohomo, or ancient (i.e. middle-east), can make every citizens life a nightmare, regardless of state of technology. Where you shop and your MDs visits etc. have likely been tracked by other means for a while already, and many (like myself) have a mileage dependent insurance, which is close to half a price for 80% of the people I would guess, and therefore are tracked anyways.

NuttBoxer says

This is patently false, and woefully uninformed:

You do know what an FEIN is right? You need one to have an LLC in New Mexico. All this data is stored and linked to your name. This is indisputable and not false. You’re falling prey to a marketing gimmick that New Mexico and attorneys use to extract money from you. Plain and simple.

LLC’s protect assets, not your personal information. You may be confusing it with a trust. Which ultimately is still traceable. Fine if New Mexico doesn’t have a PUBLIC database, they still know who you are and you are not flying under the radar.

Understand that I worked with landlords that had tenants that wanted to kill them. You cannot hide from people that want to find you let alone LEO’s. You can pretend to think you’re not traceable, but that is patently false.

They can ID you via heartbeat now.

They need to have your cardiac signature in their DB, but once they do, they can ID you from 20-200 meters away via a laser beam (it takes about 30 seconds to read you)

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613891/the-pentagon-has-a-laser-that-can-identify-people-from-a-distanceby-their-heartbeat/

Then when the ID the person they want, he is already illuminated for the drone strike. Or just turn up the wattage and "phaser" the guy.

Hircus says

They can ID you via heartbeat now.

They need to have your cardiac signature in their DB, but once they do, they can ID you from 20-200 meters away via a laser beam (it takes about 30 seconds to read you)

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613891/the-pentagon-has-a-laser-that-can-identify-people-from-a-distanceby-their-heartbeat/

Read that, pretty crazy. But I would bet they hardly have anybody in the DB and it would take decades to fill it, plus it probably works only for moderately healthy people. Which would no necessarily have their pattern in the DB until they start going to physicals in their 40s. I'm pretty sure the signature can change over the years and may be steady for a decade or two.

mell says

Read that, pretty crazy. But I would bet they hardly have anybody in the DB and it would take decades to fill it, plus it probably works only for moderately healthy people. Which would no necessarily have their pattern in the DB until they start going to physicals in their 40s. I'm pretty sure the signature can change over the years and may be steady for a decade or two.

Exactly. This kind of stuff is still a LONG way off from being used mainstream..

That's why I always take the scenic route:

mell says

hardly have anybody in the DB and it would take decades to fill it

If they can put cameras in public that use facial recognition, they can self-populate the DB pretty quick in areas with cameras - camera ID's you, while laser collects cardiac signals on you. It will get better each time it sees you, and gets more and more confident that it's seeing the same person each time the face and heartbeat matches, even if they only get a few seconds of heartbeats per encounter.

I think this electronic ID stuff will be used primarily in ways where a positive ID isn't critical. Instead, a confidence score will be used and recorded, and humans will manually step in to verify if they're interested in you. i.e., if you abduct a child, they will have the system show their human reviewers all sightings of you where the system a score of > 80 or w/e.

It needs to be used to identify and continuously publish the locations of Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, Jeff Bezos, etc.

Let's see how they like it.

Hircus says

If they can put cameras in public that use facial recognition, they can self-populate the DB pretty quick in areas with cameras - camera ID's you, while laser collects cardiac signals on you. It will get better each time it sees you, and gets more and more confident that it's seeing the same person each time the face and heartbeat matches, even if they only get a few seconds of heartbeats per encounter.

True, but facial recognition is FAR from accurate. And there are many ways you can beat it. I've started leaving my front visor down permanently on my car.

Posted for a reader who doesn't post:

>> some simple points
>>
>> <> they assume the car is in your name or in the name of an LLC you can be traced through (this could be completely false, the car could be borrowed through a chain of parties, you could have false ID with insurance card written in that false ID, the car could be owned through a complex chain of overseas front and holding companies not subject to any sort of US jurisdiction, and registered to do business in a given state by offshore attorneys or agents who are not subject to any sort of US or state interogation or subpoena, the car could have fake plates in the sense that chop shops could make VIN and other alternations and use salvage title off a seemingly identical vehicle -- criminals running high end car theft rings commonly use techniques like this and etc etc all sorts of legal and illegal work arounds)
>> <> the stop was illegal and was (if he writes a ticket) extortion or fraudulent abuse of court process under color of authority. I would have told the cop to get fucked, that he was a liar and he was committing a felony under color of authority, but that it he wished to write a ticket, I would not sign for it and would file a 42 USC 1983 civil rights lawsuit against him and the state of Louisiana and his dept. If he arrested me (actually, the stop alone is an arrest under present consitutional law*), I would not resist but would unconditionally file a lawsuit. I would refuse to answer any questions. If he claimed I was not under arrest, then I would say that this by definition means I am free to go (see Mendenhall below) and tell him I intended to drive off, and that I had no duty to converse with him or wait for his dope dog, and that any violence or force he used to halt me was a criminal act. I would record him and immediately film if he pulled a gun or acted out any level of force whatsoever.
>>
>> Many of the people on your site are very very naive about the real world and what one's legal rights are -- they seem to assume that "IF" the cop can technologically execute some set of code that does such and such, and you "have no way to hide your identity", that you are powerless to do anything but accept it, which is horseshit (their false logic is "we must accept it because the cops CAN do it")
>>
>> question: hypothetical? What if the cop traced the plate, and saw the car came from Texas into Louisiana, so effected this illegal arrest if Eric refused to cooperate (that's what it is, Patrick, let's be clear on this), and then it turned out that Eric's cousin had come to his workplace and borrowed the car to drive to Texas for a few hours and see her sick mom, and brought it back by when Eric got off work, and he had just dropped her off at her house before he was stopped
>>
>> What then? Big problem for Piggie and Piggie Department
>>
>> United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 554 (1980) (/“a person has been ‘seized’ within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave”/*). See also Reid v. Georgia, 448 U.S. 438 (1980); United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 878 (1975); Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 16–19 (1968); Kaupp v. Texas, 538 U.S. 626 (2003). Apprehension by the use of deadly force is a seizure subject to the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness requirement. See, e.g., Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (police officer’s fatal shooting of a fleeing suspect); Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (1989) (police roadblock designed to end car chase with fatal crash); Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (police officer’s ramming fleeing motorist’s car from behind in attempt to stop him); Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U.S. _, No. 12–1117, slip op. (2014) (police use of 15 gunshots to end a police chase). The Court has also made clear that the Fourth Amendment applies to pre-trial detention. See Manuel v. Joliet, 580 U.S. _, No. 14–9496, slip op. at 1 (2017) /(holding that a petitioner who “was held in jail for seven weeks after a judge relied on allegedly fabricated evidence to find probable cause that he had committed a crime” could “challenge his pretrial detention on the ground that it violated the Fourth Amendment”)./ (say they arrested me and kept me in jail because I refused to recognize the court's authority to hear a case based on fabricated evidence cooked up by a fascist pig)

Qualifications on my comment: (1) I'm fairly sure the law is what I quoted, but not 100% sure, I didn't Shepardize the cases, there is another USSC case called vs D________ (maybe Dunaway?) vs New York, can't remember last name or find it, but it basically sets the standard you are under arrest if a reasonable person would not feel free to leave, which this "Officer" Luke has made clear to Eric

(2) yes, I well realize that for some offshore company to register a car here, they have to have an agent registered with the SOS who is subject to subpoena, but that does't mean the agent is necessarily knowledgeable about the identity of who is driving it or who ultimately owns it. Maybe evil offshore attorneys tricked him. Is that a crime on his part? Can he tell what he doesn't know?

(3) did any of the persons so brilliantly analyzing this question see The Great Escape? Remember Donald Pleasance's character Colin the forger? Just noting this hypothetically. You people commenting need to quickly get wakened up to the reality under a police state. Get out of your little pussy world and think about what it might take to stay out of the konzentrationlager. Do you want to be free though at serious risk, or do you want to be a kept little pussy with your coder salary and your little pussy debt-house whining about your rights?

Patrick says

a kept little pussy with your coder salary and your little pussy debt-house whining about your rights?

We have lived under a military industrial intelligence media regime since November 1963, probably longer. They can do whatever they want to you.

Patrick says

some simple points

Agree that what he said is correct, but I think an important point to remember is as much as possible, try to avoid standing out. That should prevent most traffic stops. As to the rest, absolutely there are MANY ways to avoid detection, and the attitude that we should just give up and accept being tagged and tracked like animals is complete horseshit. In it's simplest form, avoiding detection would just be moving to the country(no cameras).

Beyond that using an LLC registered in a state that respects privacy, and using a ghost address(physical address not your home). Don't ever submit to a credit check, which can lead to larger up front deposits on utilities, but those are usually returned in a year. Pay cash, use prepaid cards that aren't registered with your info. Online use a reputable VPN(3rd party verification they do not log, preferably court case). Don't use ISP or google DNS. Use Tor for all browsing. Use an email client such as Protonmail with multiple accounts. Use a prepaid or no contract non-smart cellphone, with battery out whenever not in use. Use a different cellphone if you need one outside of the house, and never bring it to the house.

Seems like a lot, but I don't know of anything worth doing that is easy.