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

Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 354 posts

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#181

Post by [deleted] »

arjie wrote: post #177
infecto wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we’re talking past each other. I’m not claiming “Taiwan is extremely racist, therefore low crime.” I’m saying cohesive societies often have stronger in-group preferences and social expectations than Americans tend to recognize, and those coexist with being welcoming to many foreigners. Your experience and your relative’s experience are perfectly compatible with that. One or two positive anecdotes don’t tell u…

I understand what you're saying but it seems like a complete non-sequitur given the context of the conversation, which I'll reproduce here in threaded fashion in case it's not visible in your client. > > > We need some way to address the low level crime in the US. If you look at cities in east Asia, they're both much larger than typical US cities and much safer. It -is- possible to have safe large cities. The fact th…

[deleted]

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#182

Post by microgpt »

crises-luff-6b wrote: post #72

There is no expectation of privacy in public. It's really that simple.

There was an implicit expectation that, although people could take your picture, there weren't a million people roaming around taking everyone's pictures all the time because it takes a few seconds to take someone's picture.

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#183

Post by Manuel_D »

aquir wrote: post #27

I don't get why any of these devices are still intact...

Because most of the American public is not as reflexively anti-Flock as HN would lead you to believe. People acting like cameras recording their activities in public is some sort of grave privacy violation are not the norm.

Cameras recording tour activity in malls, and on public roads has been the case since the 90s. Flock became a lightning rod of attention due to ICE, but they don't actually represent any change from the status quo.

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#184

Post by microgpt »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #174
kodablah wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And people that don't run red lights and suffer selective enforcement and are used for arbitrary surveillance and so on and so on. Don't let your naive view of what you want these things and their handlers to do distract you from reality, regardless of the brand or intent of widely deployed cameras.

Traditional red light cameras take a still frame and are triggered only during a red light violation.

That's actually a problem because sometimes they catch people who weren't running the red light, but easily fixed by capturing a bit more.

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#185

Post by microgpt »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #167
nilamo wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great point. We should build a network that tracks all cops to make sure they don't get up to no good while off duty.

Are you one of those guys who hates the cops until you need one? Do you also forget that cops are people, too?

I used to hate the cops until I needed one, and then they were horrible to me and didn't solve my problem and actually started a reverse investigation against me for the thing I reported someone else doing, so now I hate the cops even when I need one.

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#186

Post by sarchertech »

derektank wrote: post #30
righthand wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US cities are plenty safe. The fact that you think otherwise is propaganda you’ve been successfully served. I live in Nyc and visit other cities often.

NYC is quite safe compared to most US cities. It is still more dangerous than most major cities in the developed world.

I did a quick check here and it has a lower crime and a higher safety score than London and Paris.

https://www.numbeo.com/crime/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Uni...

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#187

Post by Terr_ »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #167
nilamo wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great point. We should build a network that tracks all cops to make sure they don't get up to no good while off duty.

Are you one of those guys who hates the cops until you need one? Do you also forget that cops are people, too?

How backwards. Parent poster is talking about treating cops closer to how regular people are being treated.

If you're really committed to fairness, you'll take away the off-duty/unofficial privileges and immunities that they have which are not shared with "people too."

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#188

Post by Manuel_D »

Cider9986 wrote: post #101
crises-luff-6b wrote: post #72

There is no expectation of privacy in public. It's really that simple.

Actually, the supreme court ruled that police have to get a warrant to view cell tracking data and attach a location tracking device to cars. Flock is a clever workaround that should be illegal, but before that can happens we can get them removed at the city council level.

Both of those two above cases involve tracking people both in public and in private. Furthermore the former involved compelling a company to fork over private information.

Traffic cameras, by comparison, only record people's in public. A police officer isn't violating privacy laws by standing at an intersection and writing down the plates of cars passing by is he? Flock is just automating that task.

The whole reason why we have license plates is to facilitate monitoring cars. If we really think that people have a right to keep their vehicular activities private, then surely the bigger privacy violation is the fact that we require cars to display unique identifiers in a prominent manner?

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#189

Post by Manuel_D »

pixl97 wrote: post #58
Spooky23 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally legal. The operating theory of all of these cameras is that anything happening in public sight is by its nature not private. The federal government is dumping millions and millions of dollars into grant programs for municipalities to buy it… It’s a giant federal surveillance program disguised as decisions made by individual police departments. It’s hilarious and depressing to contrast the HN community reactio…

The last 20 years has burned privacy into the ground for a large part of the population.

The plain view doctrine dates back to the 70s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_view_doctrine

Re: Flock cameras track more than your license plate, and they're spreading fast

#190

Post by neilv »

nilamo wrote: post #154
microgpt wrote: post #121

It's legal for any random citizen to build one of these surveillance networks, right?

That's a great point. We should build a network that tracks all cops to make sure they don't get up to no good while off duty.

The police where I live are generally good, and I imagine that's the case many places. Treating police as the enemy, or a punching bag, is unfair and counterproductive.

(I can't speak to any places that might have a lot of corruption or ill intent.)

Places that aren't too corrupt, you'd be better off encouraging a partnership among citizens, police, lawmakers, and other officials. Which is how it's supposed to be. Everyone in the government has their respective duties, and they operate within a framework that's ultimately decided by the people.

If, for example, police propose certain surveillance, to help keep everyone safe, within their scope, then sometimes someone with different or larger scope might need to say, yes, but there's also these other considerations. Eventually a decision is made by the public or their elected representatives, and everyone nods with respect, and aligns, and continues their respective duties within the frameworks.

Post reply on HN