Government now has right to track you using GPS

[The Johnny]

So, a GPS device needs to receive transmitter information, and then re-broadcast it, like a cellphone or some sort of wireless/wifi gadget, yes?

There must be some sort of scanner that can identify if a wireless device is broadcasting somewhere in the vicinity.  The GPS device itself couldn't be too fancy, simpley due to cost considerations, so there may be an easy way to figure out if you've been tagged.


Hell, there's probably even an app for that.

If there are detectors for hidden cameras, there MUST/SHOULD exist ones for GPS.

[Jenne]

That spy stuff you can get to spy on your wife/nanny/etc.--most of it DID originate in military ops/government spy labs (or by contract), right?  That's what I've always heard, anyway.

It would stand to reason, the way engineers and inventors are contracted...

Its difficult to tell sometimes. I think many of the companies got their start that way... but at this point the home market for 'spying' is pretty huge according to some of the people I've met in the security business. Hell, I know one guy that has a company which does fingerprint readers/scanners and just recently got his first government contract a good 10 years after starting the business...

(Fingerprint reader tied to a switch tied to the fuel pump = no more stolen HumVees in Iraq. So the theory goes).

...but I'm thinking the technology maybe STARTS at the development level FOR the gummament or it swipes it up after surveying the up-and-comers on the horizon, cornering the market before they hit retail.

Seems all the new drugs start out that way, too.

[bds]

If they send out via Wi-Fi, you could totally man in the middle that shit. All you'd need is a cheap ass router and a netbook.

[Don Coyote]

If they send out via Wi-Fi, you could totally man in the middle that shit. All you'd need is a cheap ass router and a netbook.

Interesting.

http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=60&id=13#article

Fuck I know I should hung out with my grandpa more and gotten into ham radio.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

http://www.thechildrensinitiative.org/pdfs/report_card/CI_ReportCard_2009_final_web.pdf

That's where I get most of my data for San Diego--I work for these people through PTA.  And they have some great facts/figures for countywide data on what ethnicities have low birth rates (a number one indicator of poverty, welfare and health), poverty levels and food stamp users across the county.  Central, south and east counties, where the highest concentration of minorities live, have more than the rest of the parts of the county combined.

"Higher rates of poverty" is different from "most brown people are poor".

This is important to me. Most smudgy people are working or middle-class. Most smudgy people are educated. This is in defiance of media misrepresentation, because they want you to think that we are mostly impoverished and undereducated and therefore, ignorant and likely to steal from you.

Yes, too many smudgy people live in poverty and are under-educated, but that is very, very different from "most".

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Middle class would be an income between $17,499-35,000... (33.3%ish-70%ish)

Of course that high class would mean from $35,000 to the billions that the top 6% own and puts everyone to shame...

35k is not considered upper class in the US by any means.  That's middle class.  You have to be making 6 figures (or close to it) to be upper class.

As an aside, 32k is median income for Latino households in the US.

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

The 2010 Poverty Guidelines for the
48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia 
Persons in family Poverty guideline
1 ---------------  $10,830
2 ---------------  14,570
3 ---------------  18,310
4 ---------------  22,050
5 ---------------  25,790
6 ---------------  29,530
7 ---------------  33,270
8 ---------------  37,010
For families with more than 8 persons, add $3,740 for each additional person.


2010 Poverty Guidelines for Alaska 
Persons in family Poverty guideline
1 ---------------  $13,530
2 ---------------  18,210
3 ---------------  22,890
4 ---------------  27,570
5 ---------------  32,250
6 ---------------  36,930
7 ---------------  41,610
8 ---------------  46,290
For families with more than 8 persons, add $4,680 for each additional person.


2010 Poverty Guidelines for Hawaii 
Persons in family Poverty guideline
1 --------------- $12,460
2 ---------------  16,760
3 ---------------  21,060
4 ---------------  25,360
5 ---------------  29,660
6 ---------------  33,960
7 ---------------  38,260
8 ---------------  42,560
For families with more than 8 persons, add $4,300 for each additional person.

SOURCE:  Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 148, August 3, 2010, pp. 45628–45629

[Jenne]

http://www.thechildrensinitiative.org/pdfs/report_card/CI_ReportCard_2009_final_web.pdf

That's where I get most of my data for San Diego--I work for these people through PTA.  And they have some great facts/figures for countywide data on what ethnicities have low birth rates (a number one indicator of poverty, welfare and health), poverty levels and food stamp users across the county.  Central, south and east counties, where the highest concentration of minorities live, have more than the rest of the parts of the county combined.

"Higher rates of poverty" is different from "most brown people are poor".

This is important to me. Most smudgy people are working or middle-class. Most smudgy people are educated. This is in defiance of media misrepresentation, because they want you to think that we are mostly impoverished and undereducated and therefore, ignorant and likely to steal from you.

Yes, too many smudgy people live in poverty and are under-educated, but that is very, very different from "most".

I get a different sort of media than you, obviously.  Because the media *I* listen to is wanting to help EVERYONE, especially when the agenda of Fox News and the like is to make you afraid of the poor, while espousing simultaneously that they are one of them, too.  Folksy vs. down-home I guess.

I see no reason to be afraid of what the stats show, consistently, in terms of public and government aid, as well as education levels and low birthrates.  To me, that's a standard bearer of where aid should be applied, where best practices should be shared, where the most resources set aside to HELP should be lifted up and given.

I don't see the stats I use as indicating anything but a need to, as they say in the biz, "close the gap."

Most of anyone is going to be the majority, because the majority is, after all, the majority for a reason.  But in CA, that tide is changing, and rapidly.  Whites here give birth to less babies.  So what does that leave?

[Jenne]

By the bye, poverty guidelines are what you are to BEAT.  So saying a family of 4 making $27K is poor means what, exactly, to the government?

That's a pretty damned important question.

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

By the bye, poverty guidelines are what you are to BEAT.  So saying a family of 4 making $27K is poor means what, exactly, to the government?

That's a pretty damned important question.

I just know those are the guidelines you have to be below to qualify for State of Federal help.  Foodstamps, TANF, Medicaid and such.

[Doktor Howl]

By the bye, poverty guidelines are what you are to BEAT.  So saying a family of 4 making $27K is poor means what, exactly, to the government?

That's a pretty damned important question.

It means your opinions can be ignored safely.

[Jenne]

By the bye, poverty guidelines are what you are to BEAT.  So saying a family of 4 making $27K is poor means what, exactly, to the government?

That's a pretty damned important question.

I just know those are the guidelines you have to be below to qualify for State of Federal help.  Foodstamps, TANF, Medicaid and such.

It means your opinions can be ignored safely.

exactly.

Or, somewhere between paying them off and poverty, you're pretty much nonexistent, until you pay taxes.

[Chairman Risus]

Forgive me if this has already come up, but if a police agency is putting a tracking device on your car, wouldn't they already have a warrant to enter your property anyway?

[Doktor Howl]

Forgive me if this has already come up, but if a police agency is putting a tracking device on your car, wouldn't they already have a warrant to enter your property anyway?

No.  That's the whole point.

[Jasper]

They sell GPS jammers that you can power with your in-car cig lighter.  For thirty bucks. 

Kinda want to get one and test it.