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

191–200 of 439 posts

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#191

Post by dietr1ch »

jachee wrote: post #161
snovv_crash wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Black spray paint is less effort

Paintballs are even better, environmentally and effort-wise. Especially if the propellant tank is pressurized using a solar powered compressor. (Theoretically, of course. I wouldn’t advocate destroying private property.)

Destroying public property is bad in a general sense, but not enough to describe the situation here.

Would you take the knife out of your robber? Or is that stealing private property?

Surveillance endangers society/democracy and it's a threat too

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#192

Post by bix6 »

njovin wrote: post #176
etdznots wrote: post #96

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…

IANAL but if this is actually true then they're violating California law. I submitted a CCPA request to them to give me and delete everything they had on me. Their response is that they own no data, and I have to make the request to their customer, whomever that may be. If they're retaining any identifying data about me and then selling it to new customers, they are explicitly violating CCPA.

That’s nice you got a response from them. I did not.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#194

Post by smalltorch »

alhirzel wrote: post #184
smalltorch wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Id have to re-listen as well for all the details. But I think this is slightly different than the headline here. In this case, the county voted for an ordinance banning them. Ike was threatened saying your going to be charged this is potentially state property, he did a sunshine request to see that they were privately owned by flock. Then he requested flock take them down but they didn't. After a few months he decide…

Didn't know about sunshine request - the website[1] - until I searched for this term! [1]: https://www.sunshinerequest.com/

Im not sure if there is a way to verify that the one he is talking about, but for public records request muckrock is great.

https://www.muckrock.com

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#195

Post by alex43578 »

Varelion wrote: post #185
alex43578 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part?

All of it Fox News drivel. Hence if was flagged.

Can you dispute any of it with facts?

In CA: Kostas Linardos had 17 tickets — including for speeding, reckless driving and street racing — and had been in four collisions. Then, in November 2022, he gunned his Ram 2500 truck as he entered a Placer County highway and slammed into the back of a disabled sedan, killing a toddler, court records show. He’s now facing felony manslaughter charges.

In December of last year, while that case was open, the DMV renewed his driver’s license.

https://calmatters.org/investigation/2025/04/license-to-kill...

Voting in CA:In most cases, a California voter is not required to show identification to a polling place worker before casting a ballot

https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-cal...

3D printer regulation: A.B. 2047 goes further than any other legislation on algorithmic print-blocking by making it a misdemeanor for the owners of these devices to disable, deactivate, or otherwise circumvent these mandated algorithms. Not only does this effectively criminalize use of any third-party, open-source 3D printer firmware, but it also enables print-blocking algorithms to parallel anti-consumer behaviors seen with DRM.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/dangers-californias-le...

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#196

Post by ryukoposting »

glaslong wrote: post #140
smalltorch wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's kinda crazy you can't legally take them down even if they are banned/contract expires. IKE Skelton, a county commissioner took it into his own hands and they were pressing felony charges on him. Not sure what ended up happening. Basically flock wouldn't respond to take them down, he felt it was his duty to remove them, he brought them back to his office, and then the state hunted him down. Here is a podcast…

I'm curious how they could prevent taking them down if the local gov doesn't renew the contract? Presumably they're installed under some works dept land/pole/utility access permits that allow them the space and electrical, which all goes away and requires their removal. Sorry if this is answered in the pod, don't have time for it immediately.

> I'm curious how they could prevent taking them down if the local gov doesn't renew the contract?

IANAL but based on the facts available to me, they can't. It's a sham held up by intimidating local officials. The cameras were installed on public property, that's that.

If they somehow keep this nonsense running for very long, I'd anticipate a Meigs Field-esque incident at some point.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#197

Post by moron4hire »

smalltorch wrote: post #170
glaslong wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how they could prevent taking them down if the local gov doesn't renew the contract? Presumably they're installed under some works dept land/pole/utility access permits that allow them the space and electrical, which all goes away and requires their removal. Sorry if this is answered in the pod, don't have time for it immediately.

Id have to re-listen as well for all the details. But I think this is slightly different than the headline here. In this case, the county voted for an ordinance banning them. Ike was threatened saying your going to be charged this is potentially state property, he did a sunshine request to see that they were privately owned by flock. Then he requested flock take them down but they didn't. After a few months he decide…

Moral of the story: never talk to the police. Even if you yourself are police.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#198

Post by thesuitonym »

jonahx wrote: post #125
etdznots wrote: post #96

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…

Is there any realistic road to having them outlawed nationwide? Eg, ignoring probabilities here, could a wildly successful grassroots program where it became an issue as politically salient as immigration or abortion eventually lead to legislation banning them?

A national ban is unlikely to happen. Big companies like Flock are incredibly experienced at paying off enough of the Congress to stop legislation they don't like. You're better off trying to focus your efforts on your local municipalities and the state.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#199

Post by thesuitonym »

bmau5 wrote: post #145
gxs wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t know this but it’s the kind of stuff our tax dollars pay for and ultimately why I’m so disgruntled about the high taxes we pay - especially in the middle class No problem paying taxes - my entire gripe is with what what the moneys spent on

Would love to see someone vibecode an explorer for seeing how their jurisdiction spent their taxes. Denver has a decent explorer here: https://www.denvergov.org/transparency/checkbook#/home?year=...

Why do you need to vibecode an explorer when financial analysis tools are a dime a dozen?

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#200

Post by ksymph »

undersuit wrote: post #102
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!

Maybe the police are part of the problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LASD_deputy_gangs

Main article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_Los_Angeles_Count...
Post reply on HN