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

Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 507 posts

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#91

Post by aaroninsf »

embedding-shape wrote: post #68
kklisura wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]: > You're thinking Chinese surveillance > US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims [1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288 [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955

I've never heard about this Tan guy before, I don't keep up with politics/corporatism anymore, but is that possibly sarcasm? It sure feels like it to me. But again, I don't know this person, but if I came across that by itself I feel like it's pretty clearly sarcastic, as Twitter tends to be. Maybe I'm just tone deaf myself to how tone deaf others could be?

It is not sarcastic.

Generally speaking, today, surveillance capitalism is the foundation of both our political culture, economy, and the tech industry that backs them.

In polite circles we call surveillance "user telemetry" and the like. It's not just Palantir and FLock; where does Meta's money come from...? Google's for that matter...?

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#92

Post by leeoniya »

kklisura wrote: post #58
kklisura wrote: post #46

For more context here Flock Safety is a YC-backed company [1][2] [1] https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/flock-safety [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1856016868580151615

And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]: > You're thinking Chinese surveillance > US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims [1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288 [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955

> You're thinking Chinese surveillance

the big irony, of course, is that i'm much more comfortable with China surveilling me than the US, since the latter can throw me in jail, seize my assets, and ruin my family's life, while the former cannot.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#93

Post by goda90 »

gruez wrote: post #78
varispeed wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

>This is clear fascism, but people are too afraid to admit. We have sleep walked into it. >With such surveillance, administration can [...] Have you missed all the cries of "fascism" back in 2016/2017? The problem isn't "people are too afraid to admit". It's that "wolf!" was cried too many times and people tuned it out. Ironically this invocation "fascism" is arguably also crying wolf. From wikipedia: >Fascism is cha…

>Fascism is characterized by support for a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived interest of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

These things don't just happen overnight. It's not crying wolf when you see the wolf on the horizon running towards you.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#94

Post by gruez »

givemeethekeys wrote: post #90
gruez wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what? Under current jurisprudence collecting license plates images isn't illegal, because there's no expectation of privacy in public. They could post the information online if they wanted to and they'd be in the clear. It's fine to object to ANPR networks on the basis of "mass surveillance" or whatever, but screaming for people to be arrested without legal basis, just because you don't like what they're doing is…

[flagged]

You're probably being facetious, but aiding criminals isn't illegal unless you're knowingly doing it. Signal is known to be used by criminals, and on top their app is specifically designed to frustrate law enforcement, yet they stayed clear of lawsuits.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#95

Post by gs17 »

eddyg wrote: post #47

Yes, they should be secured so they can only be accessed by law enforcement. But if your spouse/SO/sister/mother/girlfriend/whatever was assaulted while jogging in a park that had Flock cameras, and it allowed law enforcement to quickly identify, track, apprehend and charge the criminal, you'd absolutely be grateful for the technology. There's nothing worse than being told "we don't have any leads" when someone you c…

They should also require a warrant at least, especially for any data sharing. With "they can only be accessed by law enforcement", we've already had plenty of police harassing their exes. If they couldn't convince a judge to let them use the camera, there's really no hope of the case going anywhere.

> There's nothing worse than being told "we don't have any leads" when someone you care about is attacked.

I'd argue worse is "we know exactly who did it and we're not going to do anything about it (but we would do something if you try to do something about it yourself)".

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#96

Post by [deleted] »

kklisura wrote: post #58
kklisura wrote: post #46

For more context here Flock Safety is a YC-backed company [1][2] [1] https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/flock-safety [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1856016868580151615

And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]: > You're thinking Chinese surveillance > US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims [1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288 [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955

[deleted]

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#97

Post by goda90 »

cm2187 wrote: post #88
SamInTheShell wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You miss the point. This is a law enforcement tool. The average American doesn’t want a surveillance state and that’s literally what’s happening. The legal aspect of it is not in question here. Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right. Anyone deploying or involved with this technology should be embarrassed and ashamed of themselves.

That's not the point the video makes. Flock didn't invent CCTV. Not that I am trying to defend mass surveillance or incompetent silicon valley companies.

Flock "invented" CCTV in the USA that doesn't requiring going to multiple locations and asking for their tapes in order to track someone across locations.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#98

Post by stackedinserter »

Easy solution for Flock problem: get rid of visible license plates. Make them 2x1" of size and RFID-readable, give readers to police, problem solved.

Not-that-easy solution is legal ban for such surveillance.

None of these both will happen though.

You accepted TSA and PRISM, you will get used to Flock too.

Next is Flock but for people, with face recognition.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#99

Post by isoprophlex »

kklisura wrote: post #58
kklisura wrote: post #46

For more context here Flock Safety is a YC-backed company [1][2] [1] https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/flock-safety [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1856016868580151615

And let me share this reply by Garry Tan, CEO of YC, after someone made a comment that Flock might be _pretty dystopian_ [1][2]: > You're thinking Chinese surveillance > US-based surveillance helps victims and prevents more victims [1] https://x.com/neurajordan/status/1963303084609966288 [2] https://x.com/garrytan/status/1963310592615485955

jesus fuck the gloves really came off in the past few years. noone even cares to hide it anymore.

i could almost admire the transparency of these people, the way they're apparently okay accepting collateral damage of their schemes, up to the complete destruction of the fabric of society... as long as there's money to be made.

Re: Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves

#100

Post by fzeroracer »

eddyg wrote: post #47

Yes, they should be secured so they can only be accessed by law enforcement. But if your spouse/SO/sister/mother/girlfriend/whatever was assaulted while jogging in a park that had Flock cameras, and it allowed law enforcement to quickly identify, track, apprehend and charge the criminal, you'd absolutely be grateful for the technology. There's nothing worse than being told "we don't have any leads" when someone you c…

What if your spouse/SO/whatever was wrongfully arrested because they were on a Flock camera and conveniently matched what the police were looking for? Or if they ran whatever dogshit AI algorithm over it looking for suspects?

We can make up situations all day where it can or can not be validated but the reality is that this is a defacto surveillance state. If every move you make can be monitored, you should assume that the state can and will abuse it to hurt innocent people in the name of politics or whatever.

Post reply on HN