I was thinking more of a domestic violence situation that arose after people had agreed to share their tag tracking info. Not the surreptitious tag stalking (monitoring someone without them knowing) situation.

The surreptitious tag stalking was less on my mind, more the family with the domestic violence problem. Dropping the tag and leaving it somewhere is a cleaner solution. I'm tempted to think there is some reason why Apple is so hesitant to allow easy tag sharing.

> and allow opt-out any time

The problem with this is in the domestic violence or stalking situation is that it becomes known to the other person that the AirTag has stopped sharing. (It doesn't matter if it happens through notification or the AirTag disappears from the other person's screen.)

Until the person stops sharing their AirTag the location is shared with the other person and so leads to some point where the AirTag sharing is then turned off.

One way around this is to allow a scramble AirTag location, whereby the person can press a button and the AirTag location is reported as somewhere random and different.

> Either of us could leave at any time.

But not cleanly. The problem with this is in the domestic violence or stalking situation is that it becomes known to the other person that the AirTag has stopped sharing. (It doesn't matter if it happens through notification or the AirTag disappears from the other person's screen.)

Until the person stops sharing their AirTag the location is shared with the other person and so is something of a route to some point where the AirTag sharing is then turned off.

One way around this is to allow a scramble AirTag location, whereby the person can press a button and the AirTag location is reported as somewhere random and different.

>The only real alternative is to not have the technology exist at all. That’s not going to happen.

I just watched a company attempt to create a fictional $1 million contractural fine for misuse of their product. They may not be able to make this one work out.

Well they can't be too successful at fighting crime. After all, if the NYPD managed to find a recipe which eliminated crime, it would be an existential threat to them. Policing as an institution need crime to survive.

As for these cameras, the huge "NYPD" branding on the cameras says a lot to me. It's not NYC branding, it's not NY state branding, it's not no branding at all, it's police branding. The branding is for the purpose of dominance. This system is more about dominance than it is anything else.