71–80 of 115 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, we need laws and oversight to stop these actions. Do you realize that people use phones to stalk innocent people? And yet you probably have a phone. Why is that?
We have laws and oversight surrounding phone surveillance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception Just like you say, it still gets abused both within and outside the government (eg. Salt Typhoon) because surveillance inherently threatens society.
I learned about this site from the 404 media article: https://www.404media.co/casa-grande-arizona-flock-city-counc... An excerpt: > “I've spent the last several months talking to people all over Casa Grande, and one thing keeps coming up: Safety. So, today I'm excited to announce a new company called Shepherd Safety,” he said. “Our mission is simple. Keep government officials and their families safe.” It would be no…
I know this is preaching to the choir but from the article on the person holding the skimmer > Police can also use the cameras to surveil protestors and stalk ex-lovers—or strangers they find attractive. I didn't believe police actually did this until a roommate's new classmate told me her story. She has recently moved in to the neighborhood (an HOA at that). She was walking her dog one evening when a police officer…
A little searching will find you all sorts of such hits, like an officer tracking her domestic partner [0], an officer stalking someone after meeting on a TV set* [1], another officer tracking his ex partner [2], another officer tracking his mistress [3]. This is just a random sample. * Note this scenario was not with Flock, which is important: there's more than one player in this space. Kill Flock and others might r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you force surveillance on 10 people and even one of them doesn't consent, that's still a net bad. And this situation is probably closer to the inverse of those numbers, or at the very least 50/50. And this isn't even to mention the criminal negligence of Flock, and the evils they have already enabled, as committed both by Flock employees and by government.
Is surveillance special in that it needs total buy in from society, or else it's bad? Is any other aspect of governance held to that standard?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Speak for yourself. I don't mind this type of surveillance personally.
That's because you haven't thought it through. "We only want info on the bad people" might not alarm you personally until any government entity changes the definition of bad and now you're a "bad guy".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A little searching will find you all sorts of such hits, like an officer tracking her domestic partner [0], an officer stalking someone after meeting on a TV set* [1], another officer tracking his ex partner [2], another officer tracking his mistress [3]. This is just a random sample. * Note this scenario was not with Flock, which is important: there's more than one player in this space. Kill Flock and others might r…
This is quite distressing to hear. It's not the United States I know or even grew up in. What went wrong and how can we try to fix it?
This is like sending a letter to Satan asking him to please stop being a nuisance.
Yea, I am thoroughly unconvinced that protesting and asking nicely is really a way to implement political change. The people implementing these things and making these deals are sitting on their yachts and mansion balconies, sipping their martinis, and looking down at us little people with raised eyebrows, not caring in the slightest what we say. They are going to keep doing what they are doing, they're going to keep…
Austin Texas has 1 million+ residents and they stopped their contract with Flock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My only question is why you didn’t believe police could/would do this in the first place? My default perspective is that this is exactly what law-enforcement and other government officials would use this technology to do, especially if there are no guardrails or laws preventing them from abusing it.
I kinda expect the s/w engineer who wrote this would create an audit log. i.e. police-id, licence-place-id. Well that's the way I would write it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have laws and oversight surrounding phone surveillance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception Just like you say, it still gets abused both within and outside the government (eg. Salt Typhoon) because surveillance inherently threatens society.
Shouldn't we get rid of phones then?
It's unfair that criminals can opt-out of surveillance, while Senators and CEOs cannot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because you haven't thought it through. "We only want info on the bad people" might not alarm you personally until any government entity changes the definition of bad and now you're a "bad guy".
Yes, I have thought it through. Is this how you view the world? "Smart people agree with me and thoughtless people disagree with me"
Edit: Actually, it's such an extreme misconstrual that I'm wondering if you thought you were replying to a different post?