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

LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 439 posts

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#91

Post by MiloLeo »

bko wrote: post #75
annoyingnoob wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the cops can watch everything you do all the time, there will be less crime I disagree there. If cops watch us at all times then more crimes will be prosecuted, think they'll just sit bored with nothing happening? They will find things, real or not. The reality is that crime is way down, we do not need more enforcement. Leave us alone already. https://www.opencrime.us/years

What planet do you live on? Go to a low crime neighborhood. Cops are super friendly and basically spend their day happily helping old ladies cross the street or getting cats down from trees. If you think cops like cracking heads and dealing with petty crime that they'll just invent otherwise and use to harass people, you're out of your mind. You really need to get out more.

I could show you 10,000 yt videos that show there are plenty of cops that abuse power and harass.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#95

Post by copper-float »

declan_roberts wrote: post #83

I don't understand flock cameras in high crime areas. Every time somebody commits a heinous crime it's always like "they were arrested 72 times and were well known by the police" What's the point in helping the police catch criminals when they don't do anything after the fact!

These high crime areas are predominantly in blue counties/states, and liberal judges are typically soft on crime.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#96

Post by etdznots »

The best part is that flock owns the cameras and the poles so even when the contract expires the cameras keep running and recording data that flock can sell to e.g. CHP, LASD, FBI, Palantir; and LAPD can just call them and access the data

the flock scam was engineered to be resilient to political pressure by giving departments and jursidictions this fake exit ability while the data continues to be harvested, it is a noose that only tightens; the amount of flock cameras recording only ever goes up not down.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#97

Post by saghm »

JamesSwift wrote: post #82
kmacdough wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is simple: qualified immunity has become a blank check. The officer can simply claim they didn't know the law. They somehow can't be expected to understand basic constitutional protections.

Qualified immunity is more nuanced. It allows the first offense to be absolved but it works like legal precedent where future offenses by _any law enforcement officer_ is not covered. Now there’s plenty of loopholes where you can craft “unique defenses” based on nearly identical underlying offenses. But it’s important to have the distinction

How many instances of are there of qualified immunity actually resulting in an officer being found liable because of past precedent where someone else was considered to have had qualified immunity in the same circumstances? If it's not anywhere close to the number of times when they were found to be immune, then the distinction is theoretical only, and it's arguably more misleading to emphasize it as if it's a real limitation.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#98

Post by cdrnsf »

SoftTalker wrote: post #9
someperson wrote: post #8

Are there any privacy-first security camera provider where it's the city that manages data access and uses it purely for local law enforcement purposes?

Why would you trust the city more than Flock. One of the common claimed abuses of Flock data is city cops using it to stalk exes and crushes. The problem with Flock is not who owns the data, it's the potential for abuse.

The city doesn't run around accusing private citizens of being terrorists like Flock's CEO does.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#99

Post by [deleted] »

copper-float wrote: post #95
declan_roberts wrote: post #83

I don't understand flock cameras in high crime areas. Every time somebody commits a heinous crime it's always like "they were arrested 72 times and were well known by the police" What's the point in helping the police catch criminals when they don't do anything after the fact!

These high crime areas are predominantly in blue counties/states, and liberal judges are typically soft on crime.

[deleted]

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#100

Post by stackghost »

copper-float wrote: post #95
declan_roberts wrote: post #83

I don't understand flock cameras in high crime areas. Every time somebody commits a heinous crime it's always like "they were arrested 72 times and were well known by the police" What's the point in helping the police catch criminals when they don't do anything after the fact!

These high crime areas are predominantly in blue counties/states, and liberal judges are typically soft on crime.

>liberal judges are typically soft on crime.

You're going to need to back that claim up with statistics

Post reply on HN