NJ Transit is recording the conversations of thousands of passengers

[Richard Hakluyt]

You people talk on light rail systems?

What a horrifying dystopian world it is at times 

[grumbler]

But if we accept that the state has the right to collect that data regardless of particular need, then why can't the state sell it, or keep it forever, or do whatever they like with it?

If you accept that there are in fact reasonable restrictions that citizens can and should place on how the state uses the data, then you are implicitly stating that private citizens do in fact have some rights in respects to that "public" data, aren't you?

The state has no "rights' whatsoever.  it only has the powers the people give it.  The state shouldn't sell it, or keep it forever, because the people haven't given it the power to do so.

If the people limit the extent to which government can collect or use public information about them, that isn't about any rights in respect to public data, it is about the fact that governments have limited powers.

[Brazen]

Well, people should be warned that everything they say is recorded.  Then, it should be available to them the info on how long it is gonna be kept and how to they use it (yes, it's obvious, but it needs to be put in writing so that data is not resold/shared with 3rd party for different purpose than crime prevention/solving).

They've never done that for CCTV.

[grumbler]

The new jersey trains have signs that indicate that they are subject to audio and video surveillance.  From what I read, this is really about school kids fighting and bullying on the trains, more than it is about terrorism prevention.

[garbon]

You people talk on light rail systems?

What a horrifying dystopian world it is at times 

People in NJ and NY talk a lot.

[Martinus]

Apparently in Canada there is not only a right to privacy but also no right to keep a secret - just read CC's posts in the Panama papers thread.

[Malthus]

But if we accept that the state has the right to collect that data regardless of particular need, then why can't the state sell it, or keep it forever, or do whatever they like with it?

I envision the same as a privacy policy from a private corporation.
Microsoft will tell you what it collects and how it is used.  If you disagree with that, you can refuse the agreement.  If they tell you they don't seel your info and then actually sell it, you can sue them for compensation and force them to stop their practice.

If you accept that there are in fact reasonable restrictions that citizens can and should place on how the state uses the data, then you are implicitly stating that private citizens do in fact have some rights in respects to that "public" data, aren't you?

I understand that a State has the right to put cameras at every lights to monitor traffic violation.  I may not like it, but I recognize that legitimate right.  It is stated that is used for that purpose only, the cities using such cameras even advertize where they are used (in Quebec, at least).

Just as I understand that if I activate telemetry on my Win10 computer, Microsoft has the right to collect data on how my use software, how it crashes, how it conflicts.  In some places, they ask me if I want targetted advertizing or not.  I am not allowed to disable ads entirely, however.
But I have a choice to refuse the telemetry.

Absent that, because of security measures put in place by the State, I would expect a clear privacy policy: what are you recording, when are you recording, how long to you keep the records and what do you do with it.

If I am unsatisfied with this, because as you say, they decide it's a good thing to share the data with advertizers to balance their budget, then I can use legal and/or political actions to make it change.

If I am unaware of that fact because it is being kept a secret, than it is a totally different matter.

I don't like security cameras and microphones, but I can understand their use in some places where it is dangerous, and I can recognize their usefulness when aptly used.  However, there is always the risk of data overload and that is also a concern.

But if you ask on the general principle of recording citizens, am I ok with it?  Yes, I am.  But the devil is in the details.

I ... pretty well agree with that.

[Martinus]

Microsoft will tell you what it collects and how it is used.  If you disagree with that, you can refuse the agreement.  If they tell you they don't seel your info and then actually sell it, you can sue them for compensation and force them to stop their practice.

It doesn't work like this in the EU. When you are selling products or services to the general public (i.e. consumers) as opposed to businesses, you can only collect their personal data to the extent this is reasonably necessary to provide the product or service - and even then the customer may later go back and withdraw the consent (in which case you can cease to provide the service or maintain the product, but only if you are unable to do so without such data).

[CountDeMoney]

The new jersey trains have signs that indicate that they are subject to audio and video surveillance.  From what I read, this is really about school kids fighting and bullying on the trains, more than it is about terrorism prevention.

Yeah, same with the Baltimore Metro; the conductor and dispatch have audio in all the cars, and that was dealt with long before 9/11.  And for the Baltimore MTA buses, it goes back even longer to when they had VHS decks on board.  And you're right:  it was always about safety and school kids fighting, the occasional robbery/theft/etc than Evildoers^TM. 

Anyway, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy on public transportation.

[11B4V]

The new jersey trains have signs that indicate that they are subject to audio and video surveillance.  From what I read, this is really about school kids fighting and bullying on the trains, more than it is about terrorism prevention.

Yeah, same with the Baltimore Metro; the conductor and dispatch have audio in all the cars, and that was dealt with long before 9/11.  And for the Baltimore MTA buses, it goes back even longer to when they had VHS decks on board.  And you're right:  it was always about safety and school kids fighting, the occasional robbery/theft/etc than Evildoers^TM. 

Anyway, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy on public transportation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMADJcimnds

[CountDeMoney]

Well, well, well...if it isn't the star of the latest ass-to-mouth amateur porn hit, Schindler's Fist, himself.

[The Minsky Moment]

Anyway, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy on public transportation.

Even worse there is no reasonable expectation as to arrival time, when Bs and Ts are involved.