[adolph]

> So these are only being used on active calls.

I see your distinction better now. The Reynolds essay speaks a little more to the issue at hand. Essentially the technology allows for scope creep. Previously the limiting factor for physical police surveillance was officer FTEs, which creates a lower bound for the conditions that predicate an "active call." When this constraint is lifted, then Prosecutors could easily fall prey to the temptation of “picking the man, and then searching the law books . . . to pin some offense on him.”

[infecto]

Agree, which is why these discussions need to happen. I am a big proponent of this kind of tech but also welcome the discussion to figure out appropriate boundaries.