Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#41

Post by paxys »

systemvoltage wrote: post #34
ucm_edge wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They partner with police. The revenue play is charging governments access to a feed of events happening just in their jurisdiction (with some cleaning up/grouping of similar reports). Citizen gets the police to pay them for access, then gets the police to advertise the app to them as an alternative to calling non emergency dispatch. In turn more people down Citizen and Citizen can probably monetize that. In LA they e…

Curious - what can this private Citizen branded patrol actually do? Isn't it just a camera on wheels? It can't make arrests, it can't handcuff people, it can't do much legally.

A majority of private security in the country works through intimidation alone. Legally they have next to no rights, at least different from you or me or any other bystander. If I ever get harassed by mall cops or anyone else of the sort my response is always to either ignore them completely or ask them to call the cops. In both cases I am immediately left alone.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#42

Post by tablespoon »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #25
endisneigh wrote: post #16

I don’t like Citizen, but is it inherently a bad thing if there’s more accountability in the form of distributed filming of the government and its agents? My issue with citizen is more how it fear mongers and the general sentiment around what it’s doing. I also think it’s a terrible idea to encourage people to put themselves in potentially dangerous situations.

To put even a slightly finer point on it -- isn't this, in a sense, journalism without a filter? Video can lie, but it's probably a bit harder to make a live streamed video lie than an article that recapitulates the content of such a stream. One thing I do seem to see over and over is a pattern where journalists are a little annoyed when companies encroach on the role of journalists but do so for less money. I'm sure…

> To put even a slightly finer point on it -- isn't this, in a sense, journalism without a filter?

I don't think it's journalism if it doesn't have a filter. IMHO, the job of journalists is to filter through a bunch of garbage to produce something that's succinct, informative, and as truthful as possible (given the constraints). Publishing a stream of raw garbage is not that.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#43

Post by majormajor »

aiisahik wrote: post #14
sickcodebruh wrote: post #6

Two related threads on Citizen in the last few months: * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27237520 * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27236660 They reference each other, too. Citizen is nightmarish. All the “it’s a dystopian surveillance app built to exploit our worst fears” concerns about other social media products with only the most superficial veneer trying to hide it. I had it on my phone for months and…

Yes it's anxiety inducing but doesn't it just tell us the truth of who we are? If you can't handle the anxiety, nobody is forcing you to have it on your phone nor are they forcing you to be part of it. In other countries, the government has cameras everywhere and use the footage to find and prosecute. Apparently America prefers to have individuals take on that role.

If it's anything like the Ring "neighborhood alert" notifications I briefly had on after getting a doorbell: no, not really.

A filtered (only the worst things get reported) dubiously-accurate (lots of "heard something that sounded like gunshots") view of a large geographic area (they sent me stuff covering a much larger area than I would've been concerned of) isn't "the truth of who we are," it's just a window into how some people are feeling, presented by a company that stands to make more money if they can make you feel more concerned.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#44

Post by s1artibartfast »

I'm probably an outlier, but I love the concept of Citizen and dislike the implementation.

I don't have public safety anxiety, but want current data and public safety updates where I live and travel. Decentralized, unfiltered, and non editorialized news reporting is also a huge perk.

When there is a lot of police activity in my neighborhood, I want to know the cause and act accordingly. For example, if there is a gunman on the run (as has happened in the past), I would want to make sure my doors are locked.

My city and state does a terrible job of providing this information in real time and their retrospective data has been filtered extensively by law enforcement and politicians.

Areas where I wish Citizen was better are data presentation and selection. Incidents they present seem arbitrary and are a subset of the actual events. I would be more interested in average data over time and all current events plus filter options. Opt in notifications by incident type and proximity would make it a true public safety app.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#45

Post by systemvoltage »

paxys wrote: post #41
systemvoltage wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what can this private Citizen branded patrol actually do? Isn't it just a camera on wheels? It can't make arrests, it can't handcuff people, it can't do much legally.

A majority of private security in the country works through intimidation alone. Legally they have next to no rights, at least different from you or me or any other bystander. If I ever get harassed by mall cops or anyone else of the sort my response is always to either ignore them completely or ask them to call the cops. In both cases I am immediately left alone.

Yeah I don’t know the laws of private security companies. For example, if you hire private security firm to guard a bank, are they allowed to use lethal force to protect the bank?

It’s scary how close to the real deal vehicle this Citizen patrol van looks like. I think they can even put police lights on legally if I’m not mistaken.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#46

Post by joe_the_user »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #25
endisneigh wrote: post #16

I don’t like Citizen, but is it inherently a bad thing if there’s more accountability in the form of distributed filming of the government and its agents? My issue with citizen is more how it fear mongers and the general sentiment around what it’s doing. I also think it’s a terrible idea to encourage people to put themselves in potentially dangerous situations.

To put even a slightly finer point on it -- isn't this, in a sense, journalism without a filter? Video can lie, but it's probably a bit harder to make a live streamed video lie than an article that recapitulates the content of such a stream. One thing I do seem to see over and over is a pattern where journalists are a little annoyed when companies encroach on the role of journalists but do so for less money. I'm sure…

To put even a slightly finer point on it -- isn't this, in a sense, journalism without a filter? Video can lie, but it's probably a bit harder to make a live streamed video lie than an article that recapitulates the content of such a stream.

Video "lying" involves video distorting the entirety of a situation by only showing one and part of an overall action. The thing about such lying is it easy, effortless. A perfectly sincere person can walk into the middle of situation, film it, show an incorrect picture and not know it.

And the problem here is that many/most people operate with the assumption "either X is true or he's a liar" and videos that a bad picture of an event may have no intentional liars attached, which can give them more credibility than should have.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#47

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

notatoad wrote: post #40
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To put even a slightly finer point on it -- isn't this, in a sense, journalism without a filter? Video can lie, but it's probably a bit harder to make a live streamed video lie than an article that recapitulates the content of such a stream. One thing I do seem to see over and over is a pattern where journalists are a little annoyed when companies encroach on the role of journalists but do so for less money. I'm sure…

Journalism without a filter isn't journalism, it's surveillance. a critical part of journalism is choosing what not to cover. people pay attention to the things it's easy to pay attention to, and good journalism makes sure that the news that is front-and-center and easiest for people to find is actually news . not every crime scene is newsworthy, most are incredibly personal and sensitive moments for at least one par…

I don't love a definition of journalism that includes journalists getting to decide what I am allowed to know. Analysis, interpretation, calling to attention that which is important, these are all great things. The filter part I'm less sure about.

Of course we should be sensitive to victims and I don't think sensationalizing things is beneficial, but I also think that most of what I personally use Citizen for is to figure out what is happening near me in the neighborhood in real time. Like, "why is it suddenly smoky outside," or, "why are there a lot of police helicopters flying over us right now?"

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#48

Post by rabuse »

s09dfhks wrote: post #15
kevinventullo wrote: post #5

So, Uber-for-Nightcrawlers? Reference: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nightcrawler_(film)

One of my all time favorite films. As soon as I read this headline I thought of it immediately. Could this lead to a new breed of ambulance chasers seeking a different kind of pay-day?

Tbh, I love this kind of content. I've been watching live stream happenings/disasters for quite some time now through a multitude of apps, so the more the merrier.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#49

Post by MattGaiser »

busterarm wrote: post #9
MattGaiser wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Citizen break regulations in some way? I thought that filming crime and police was solidly legal.

They just haven't been sued yet by the family of a user who has been killed while filming a violent crime. When they do their insurance costs will become astronomical. This pay structure encourages users to put themselves in harm's way.

How does this work for freelance journalists? Their risk is astronomical too.

Re: Citizen pays New Yorkers to livestream crime scenes

#50

Post by notatoad »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #47
notatoad wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalism without a filter isn't journalism, it's surveillance. a critical part of journalism is choosing what not to cover. people pay attention to the things it's easy to pay attention to, and good journalism makes sure that the news that is front-and-center and easiest for people to find is actually news . not every crime scene is newsworthy, most are incredibly personal and sensitive moments for at least one par…

I don't love a definition of journalism that includes journalists getting to decide what I am allowed to know. Analysis, interpretation, calling to attention that which is important, these are all great things. The filter part I'm less sure about. Of course we should be sensitive to victims and I don't think sensationalizing things is beneficial, but I also think that most of what I personally use Citizen for is to f…

"It amazes me how the news you have so neatly fits the space available,” Lord Vetinari went on, staring down at the page Boddony was working on. “No little gaps anywhere. And every day something happens that is important enough to be at the top of the first page, too. How strange"
Post reply on HN