Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes • Hacker News Board

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#41

Post by lokar » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 12:58 AM UTC

nancyminusone wrote: post #9

mullingitover wrote: post #6

I worry that Flock is going to take the fall, and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up where they left off while everyone's patting themselves on the back for defeating Flock. The stuff Flock is doing is going to be standard AI-driven surveillance in the future, and unless the actual practices are made into political third rails and made into crimin…

My money would be on Axon. They at least have a claim to the "hold police accountable" angle with bodycams and less-lethal weapons. Compared with Flock's "we'll watch you and what're you gonna do about it"

NPR reported they are already moving in with a competing product .

https://www.npr.org/2026/08/22/nx-s1-5931446/flock-fallout-c...

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#42

Post by Gigachad » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 12:58 AM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #20

legitster wrote: post #17

I know this is an extremely hot take, but it's not the license plate reading service that bothers me. A license plate is specifically a tracking number to identify a registered vehicle on a public road. The 4th Amendment gives you privacy inside of your car , but your car is not itself guaranteed privacy. Before Flock, police departments already had informally aggregated data from speed cameras, red light cameras, an…

Recent WIRED[1] article goes in depth on this exact problem: > Another prompt instructs the system to list everyone arrested more than twice in two years for “any offense,” exempting only narcotics arrests, and then says to map where those people live, retrieve the calls for service at their homes, and “do a workup on the top three individuals.” The prompt begins with everyone in the area who has an arrest record and…

For a more modern example, China already has this and a lot more. The public seems largely supportive of it though because most street crimes stopped.

The potential for abuse is obviously massive, but the benefit to society is too.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#43

Post by consumer451 » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 1:00 AM UTC

Gigachad wrote: post #40

hightrix wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do not need Flock in this current iteration of society. In utopia, we would also not need Flock. Privacy should be a human right.

We don’t _need_ many things. But there are real problems that it solves and solves better than anything else. I feel like the best solution is very tightly regulating and auditing this technology so it can only be used to benefit society.

We are so far away from that even being a possibility.

We live in a world that is most corrupt and above the law, at the very top. Why would anyone trust that world? Trust is required for this technology to be willingly adopted.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#44

Post by amazingamazing » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 1:09 AM UTC

m4ck_ wrote: post #32

Doxxing is bad of course but does "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" apply here? Or is that only for us working folk?

Do you believe anyone with a surveillance camera should have the owners name and address published if in any way a “public” area is recorded?

I suppose we can start with all Blink, Ring and Nest Cams. Then we will continue with dash cam owners.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#45

Post by Dig1t » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 1:14 AM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #6

I worry that Flock is going to take the fall, and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up where they left off while everyone's patting themselves on the back for defeating Flock. The stuff Flock is doing is going to be standard AI-driven surveillance in the future, and unless the actual practices are made into political third rails and made into crimin…

This is still a useful first step. Once “flock” becomes eponymous and a toxic political football, it can be applied to all future companies who do the same thing.

The word “Flock” is quickly becoming toxic, in the future we’ll be able to use it as a shorthand for all companies of this type. e.g. if I call something a cleanex everyone knows what I’m talking about regardless of whether Cleanex the company actually made the item being referred to. Similarly we’ll be able to just say “flock camera” and everyone will know what it is regardless of who makes the camera.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#46

Post by Refreeze5224 » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 1:19 AM UTC

amazingamazing wrote: post #44

m4ck_ wrote: post #32

Doxxing is bad of course but does "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" apply here? Or is that only for us working folk?

Do you believe anyone with a surveillance camera should have the owners name and address published if in any way a “public” area is recorded? I suppose we can start with all Blink, Ring and Nest Cams. Then we will continue with dash cam owners.

I don't. But I do think the CEO of a company who sells spying as a service to cops should have a taste of his own medicine.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#47

Post by rc5150 » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 1:53 AM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #31

mullingitover wrote: post #6

I worry that Flock is going to take the fall, and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up where they left off while everyone's patting themselves on the back for defeating Flock. The stuff Flock is doing is going to be standard AI-driven surveillance in the future, and unless the actual practices are made into political third rails and made into crimin…

> they will absolutely be legalized on some party line vote in the middle of the night. What would be legalized? You realize that recording people in public is already legal, right? I'm puzzled where people are getting the idea that Flock is doing something illegal.

you're being deliberately daft. Its not the recording, its the surveillance dragnet with zero regulation or oversight that creates an instant dossier on whatever datapoints are searched for, by whomever decides to search for them who has paid for access.

Honestly the nuance isn't that intellectually taxing and having to explain it to people in the tech space is tiresome.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#48

Post by rc5150 » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 1:56 AM UTC

elmer2 wrote: post #2

[flagged]

You're talking about violence like its some imaginary thing that isn't already being amplified by the government against its citizenry. The violence is already here and the surveillance state exacerbates it.

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#49

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 2:06 AM UTC

amazingamazing wrote: post #44

m4ck_ wrote: post #32

Doxxing is bad of course but does "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" apply here? Or is that only for us working folk?

Do you believe anyone with a surveillance camera should have the owners name and address published if in any way a “public” area is recorded? I suppose we can start with all Blink, Ring and Nest Cams. Then we will continue with dash cam owners.

[deleted]

Re: Flock CEO's Address Spread Online as Surveillance Backlash Explodes

#50

Post by bluefirebrand » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 2:07 AM UTC

Dig1t wrote: post #45

mullingitover wrote: post #6

I worry that Flock is going to take the fall, and some other bad actor with political connections (my money would be on Palantir) will just quietly pick up where they left off while everyone's patting themselves on the back for defeating Flock. The stuff Flock is doing is going to be standard AI-driven surveillance in the future, and unless the actual practices are made into political third rails and made into crimin…

This is still a useful first step. Once “flock” becomes eponymous and a toxic political football, it can be applied to all future companies who do the same thing. The word “Flock” is quickly becoming toxic, in the future we’ll be able to use it as a shorthand for all companies of this type. e.g. if I call something a cleanex everyone knows what I’m talking about regardless of whether Cleanex the company actually made…

I think the point you're trying to make is undermined slightly by the fact that the word I think you're looking for is "Kleenex" not Cleanex. It took me a while to figure out what you were talking about, and I did some searching online to make sure I wasn't missing something about "Cleanex" in particular

I still agree with you though ."Flock Camera" is very likely to become the general term for "public surveillance camera" and it will carry a negative weight.