> When a policy bans specific devices rather than behaviors or capabilities, it creates ambiguity for people on the ground.
To the contrary, how the heck is someone working security at the entrance supposed to check for a device's "behaviors or capabilities"? This is a quick visual inspection, this reduces ambiguity.
Presumably, the cops are aware of previous disruption with these specific devices, or threats thereof. And it's not like they're going to say exactly what, nor should they, lest it give people ideas...
> Today it’s Raspberry Pi and Flipper Zero. Tomorrow it’s BeagleBone Blacks, Arduino Qs, ESP32 dev boards, Teensy boards, Pine64s, Orange Pis...
Which is totally fine. There's no legitimate purpose in bringing any of those to a high-profile political event. Drones, laser pens, and beach balls are prohibited too.
This is the stupidest thing to get mock-offended by.
We should probably see to it that nobody brings any of those things in, as well.
Do you genuinely think that a parent with a small child does not have a legitimate reason to bring crayons and a coloring book to an event for adults or are you being hyperbolic? Cause this suggests either bad-faith or a profound lack of clarity about the issue and neither is good for your argument.
And by way of the process of excluding these children, the motivation for bringing other items without legitimate use like crayons, coloring books, and paperclips will be greatly diminished.
It's win-win. Thank you for the excellent insight!
[no legitimate purpose] + [identified as a potential threat or disturbance vector] + [described in a way useful for laypeople who will be consuming said list]
Cops are going to turn you away from this event if you carry in something that looks like circuit boards and wires.
The point is to stop the most common attackers who are sloppy idiots.
Presumably there might be children (or very bored adults) at the event?
But that's not a legitimate use.
And the crayons' delicious nature can be used to distract and bribe the constabulary.
Not hard to make a walking stick that can do wireless shenanigans, that gets overlooked by all.
Oh well, be mobile free zoning soon at this rate.
Events like these will have disclaimers like “admittance is subject to the discretion of our security staff”.
The point of the list of prohibited items is to make it easier for attendees to know the kinds of items theyre allowed to bring. What it isn’t, is an exhaustive list of anything that could be used for bad intentions.
They should have just said any computers other than mobile phones, by drilling down they enable security to fail at their job as people could bring another SBC and go its not a raspberry Pi and that highlights the crux.
Concern is this sets a standard moving forward that does not single out one SBC from others unfairly, which is what they are doing here.
Which is just a more verbose way of saying exactly what I said ;)
> They should have just said any computers other than mobile phones, by drilling down they enable security to fail at their job as people could bring another SBC and go its not a raspberry Pi and that highlights the crux.
That would cause problems for reporters bringing laptops.
What you’re missing is that this is a tech forum filled with a higher than average number of autistic and other neurological tendencies to be “technically correct”. Which isn’t who the target audience of the inauguration party will be.
Their messaging is fine for the people it’s targeted for. It wouldn’t be fine for a Defcon event, but this isn’t that.
> Concern is this sets a standard moving forward that does not single out one SBC from others unfairly, which is what they are doing here.
Different parties have different admittance codes. Some will list drugs, some will list attire (eg no trainers), some will say “no food or drink” while others might say “no disposable bbqs”.
You might be right that this sets a precedence, but Occam’s Razor suggests you’re over reacting given the nature of the event and its target audience
I've carried a flipper zero with me to use as a copy of my key when I misplaced my original.
You're presuming a lot for a single board computer that's less powerful in every way than your laptop - even as a blunt object. Sometimes authorities make arbitrary and capricious rules: that's why they are celebrating an inauguration, not a corination. If things like this never happened, we would have no need for regular elections. :-)
It's like someone watched Mr. Robot and determined their list of additional hacking tools from asking ChatGPT what tools Elliot would use.
Not something I would say about Stop-And-Frisk city but whatever.
They had the technology in Iraq to figure out where IEDs were coming from. (TF Odin)
They could also cut down on government fraud and all the homeless NGO waste/fraud. [1]
We need people to vote in governments who are interested in rooting out fraud as well as other crimes, rather than those seeking political careers who would rather freeze wheels take a blind eye to things.
Imagine believing that this stuff is effective.
https://www.brennancenter.org/media/5670/download
Strongly suggests correlation but not causation.
Chicago started with similar conditions as NYC (30 murders per 100000 in 1991), but they didn't have no-nonsense mayors like Bloomberg and Rudy. So its murder rate now is still 5 times that of NYC.
Broken window policing and stop-and-frisk absolutely worked. Stop-and-frisk was found to be unconstitutional, but it also was highly effective.
And it was not entirely unsuccessful, but definitely much less effective than policing in NYC.
I read multiple articles from both conservative and progressive sources about the drop of crime in NYC. The evidence is decidedly mixed. "Broken windows" policies probably helped a lot during the 90-s but lost their efficacy by the early 2000-s. Stop-and-frisk probably reduced the rate of serious crimes, mostly through incidental arrests but undermined some of the community trust. It also was unconstitutional.
I obviously haven't read it completely yet, but I read the parts that mention "Broken Windows". So far they seem to basically affirm everything I said:
> Now Bratton had some success in Transit, and well-publicized success, because he decided to stop people from jumping over the turnstiles. It was rampant. They wound up locking up some guy who had like $10,000 and a gun and couldn't be bothered to pay the dollar subway fare. The idea was, if I keep these guys out of the system, crime will go down. And crime went down in Transit, which is why Bratton got Boston and why he got back here. It was like, "This guy might be on to something."
> Operation Alternative
> But you can use the Broken Windows theory. Stopping a guy for drinking beer gave you a chance to run him for a warrant. Is he wanted for a violent crime? Stopping a guy for pissing in the street gave you a chance to issue a summons. Which meant if he couldn't produce ID you could bring him into the station, run his prints, and then find out he was wanted for one of last week's shootings.
During the 80s CPD ran a torture warehouse. They are currently operating under court direction for their mass use of pre textual traffic stops.
I’m not buying your “just so” story about mayors or hard nosed policing being the difference.
Once, my wife and I were stopped, but not frisked, and cited for riding bikes, on a sidewalk at 2AM on a stretch of Atlantic Ave that would kill you to ride on. It made no sense, until I found out that my neighbor and his friend had been murdered at a street party. There was a drag net out trying to find the killer and they stopped anyone for anything.
A tough city.
By that logic, I assume they've banned ski masks, skis, fake snow and pinecones. ;-)
Just an anecdote but I was screened several times in the airports (more after 9/11 because of... face) but never caught a pepper spray or other prohibited non obvious items carried accidentally.
There are USB On-the-Go compatible SDRs [1] that you can hook up to an Android phone that cost like $50 (don't know if there are any that would work with iOS though).
[1] https://www.nooelec.com/store/sdr/sdr-receivers/nesdr-nano-t... (this one doesn't support wifi frequencies, but this was off the top of my head)
Like a General Electric AM/FM clock radio from 1983, and also my purple bike: It jams nothing.
In terms of actual knowledge, wifi chips, like the one on your laptop or a raspi do not have software settings for that. They are predominately defined by hardware and by opaque binary blobs the kernel developers have their hands full reverse engineering compatible interfaces for. In addition, electrical interference far beyond what a tiny communications radio is capable of can come from dangerous items such as microwaves, electric motors and nine volt batteries plus spools of wire.
Pretty soon we'll all be texting each other on tin cans tied together with string. Until one of the cops trips over our cables.
OTG SDRs usually come with power splitter cables to power the radio from a battery pack anyway :)
I think they're more concerned with preventing a panic over any of the concerns about what someone can do with a Raspberry Pi.
This just seems to be that but phrased weirdly.
Adafruit's point on the banning of specific devices stands out as being particularly foolish. I doubt security would react well to any obvious cyberpunk cyberdeck build, regardless of the hardware inside.
They don't mention cookware or DIY either but try entering with a pressure cooker and a bag of nails. They won't pause to look for explosives.
For the sake of one day in one place, it's not worth getting angry about.
Their language here is imprecise and that’s crappy but the intent is clearly to ban little microboard computers, they’re just using “Raspberry Pi” to describe it.
These “bans” are actually just a list of prohibited items at a very specific event. Umbrellas are also on the list.
They said Raspberry PI, but the spirit of the rule is "electronic looking thing that we can't immediately determine the function of". You could probably show up with an unpopulated PCB and get turned away because it's green.
If this expands beyond a single event, I look forward to the inevitable lawsuit, and wish those seeking to oppose such suppression the best of luck.
You could also try American pie, apple pie (Hi mom) or perhaps freedom pi. A decent stars and stripes heat sink should be pretty easy to fiddle up, and probably exists already.
I have found several uses for mine which weren't in mind when I made my decision to purchase.
Some of the more niche/hobby transceivers could be used by a group of bad actors at an event, for comms that are less-monitorable than smartphones and mainstream COTS handheld transceivers.
And such hobby transceivers/transmitters might not operate on the list of RF bands that would be jammed by authorities when there's a suspected terrorist situation.
Many of these devices have exposed PCBs (either general-purpose SBCs, or specialized). So, saying "no Raspberry Pi" could be an attempt to ban all exposed PCB devices. And "no Flipper Zero" is the non-exposed-PCB problematic device that everyone has also heard of.
Kudos to the people keeping the event safe, especially given all the recently emboldened bad actors right now, who might be attracted to the event.
For hobbyists, there are numerous opportunities to advocate for your right to, e.g., carry electronics hobbyist gadgets, or to wear an artistic blinking LED jewelry piece strapped to your chest. Some of those opportunities need help, while some other opportunities could be counterproductive to your cause.
Also, people putting these regulations in place are not normal people but people that think about how people might cause mayhem. None of the things I mentioned were real threats, but they very easily could have been is the point.
The alarm clock wasn't an arduino project, the student took an alarm clock apart and put the insides into case, specifically so that it would look like a bomb, then brought it to school, and rather than receive detention and that be the end of it, the news went wild with it as a discrimination case.
These were cases of overreaction in the moment.
Maybe that's the real lesson here; these rules for the inaugural block party are not to secure the block from electronic interference, but as part of a system to manage the reactions of panicky, irrational people.
Laughed so hard. That sarcasm is so sharp it might show up on next year's banned list.
I guess they don't want anyone to jam the GPIO headers into someone's eye.
Though I don't read Adafruit, so maybe this is a normal way of writing for them.
the blog is written by people who use these tools — raspberry pi, flipper zero — in classrooms, accessibility projects. occasionally puppet shows. when a policy names devices, brand names specifically, instead of the actual threat, i wrote about it. at least you cannot complain i am ai... oh way, a i adafruit industries ! PAID POST FOR BIG AI
if this is where you get your news, welcome. the weather is still up next.
Asking because I believe the Block Party organizers likely just handed a list to the NYPD instead of asking them for input.
Also, what is the expected training to NYPD street cops what is a RasPi or Flipper? Both come in all kinds of shapes, colors, and general appearance.
Far stretch, but this could be a subtle ploy to do get technologist (i.e., here) talk about this make it go viral.
Also, not seeing why someone would care - why are you bringing your Raspberry Pi to an inauguration? Or worse, your blatantly suspicious "Flipper Zero", which, quote:
> The Flipper Zero is a portable multi-functional Security device developed for interaction with access control systems. The device is able to read, copy, and emulate RFID and NFC tags, radio remotes, iButtons, and digital access keys. It also has a GPIO interface.
People use blankets to claim more space than they need and sit when they should be standing.
Both of these are perfectly normal rules for big gatherings.
blankets tend to want to be laid out on the floor for people to sit on which takes up a lot of space causing havoc for foot traffic when people are not expecting to have to step over someone. also, they can be used to start fires. these are the same reasons they are no longer allowed at outdoor concert venues for specific types of shows.
By Government security apparatus = “by government”
People aren’t complaining that umbrellas and beach balls are also on that list. They’re just reacting to the headline without reading the article.
Which is why I make the distinction between “not allowed at an event” and “banned by the government”.
(I agree this is all ridiculous from all sides. Might as well join the circus with a cheap comment.)
Inspired by: https://youtu.be/3EFKJ9KaWGY
Actions will reveal if this mayor is honest or merely says a few populist things that sound "socialist"; whether he abolishes NYPD's civil-rights-violating SRG or not.
what idiots
Congratulations on your hiring for head of digital security for the inauguration of the mayor of New York City.
The mayor elect has drawn scrutiny from right wing agitators and there are creditable threats that some of the "angry twenty something tech bros" are going to attempt to disrupt the event or otherwise prank it.
As this event makes significant use of projectors and large digital displays, please advise the security (regular law enforcement officers that may not be familiar with the latest digital devices) for any objects that may be things that are likely inconspicuous but could be used to disrupt the event. Items that would be conspicuous in their use or have other legitimate use that the general public or credentialed reporters would be using should not be considered (e.g. laptops, cellphones).
These items will be added to the standard list of items prohibited at political events.
----
This is a bit of creative writing, but you could imagine it being fairly close to what the person who is hired to preform this role is faced with.
> le heckin' security theater targeting tinkerbros
and none addressing the elephant in the room of why Mamdani needs all of this security, or frankly, any security at all? Just a few years prior, he tweeted out #DefundThePolice, and of the NYPD specifically, suggested "Defund it. Dismantle it. End the cycle of violence." And even though he's walked some of that back, he still supports dismantling the NYPD's Strategic Response Group (whose duties including counter terrorism response). You can be sure however free of a rein the city's population of crazy transients are given to assault, slash, or push others in front of oncoming subway trains, he and his family will remain safe.