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

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

#101

Post by Manuel_D » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 8:12 PM UTC

joquarky wrote: post #99

Manuel_D wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're calling me daft yet you couldn't be bothered to answer the question. What is going the be legalized, as the above commenter wrote? What law is Flock breaking presently? Like it or not recording and photographing people in public, then selling that information is not illegal. Paparazzi do it all the time. You can point a webcam out your window, run ALPR software on the video feed, and sell access to query that…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

Pointing out the incorrect assumption that Flock is doing something illegal is not sealioning. There's a reason why none of the replies actually point to the law that Flock is supposedly breaking: because there isn't one.

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

#102

Post by 15155 » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 8:50 PM UTC

joquarky wrote: post #100

15155 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In public? I have an (actually-enumerated) First Amendment right to record you. End of argument.

Amendments don't protect you from physical harm by other citizens.

No, but my concealed pistol (that pesky second amendment) indeed does.

"If you exercise your rights, you will be hurt" - what a world to live in.

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

#103

Post by 15155 » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 8:52 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #90

15155 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an exercise, write the statute: how do you legally prevent Home Depot or Wal-Mart from videotaping their parking lots and adjacent streets as they've been doing for the past 3+ decades? I'm genuinely curious how whatever you propose wouldn't be prior restraint.

I’m currently working with a representative on draft legislation, and will return once I have it and they move to introduce it. “You can just do things.” The video capture is not the issue, but the data processing, retention, and sharing, which can trivially be regulated. CCTV for theft prevention and safety with a restricted retention period and no data sharing off the premises can remain legal. Data broker legislat…

> the data processing

Maybe?

> restricted retention period

Prior restraint.

> no data sharing off the premises

1000% prior restraint. In what world is this not abridging the freedom of the press?

Good luck.

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

#104

Post by toomuchtodo » Sat, Aug 29, 2026, 9:10 PM UTC

15155 wrote: post #103

toomuchtodo wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m currently working with a representative on draft legislation, and will return once I have it and they move to introduce it. “You can just do things.” The video capture is not the issue, but the data processing, retention, and sharing, which can trivially be regulated. CCTV for theft prevention and safety with a restricted retention period and no data sharing off the premises can remain legal. Data broker legislat…

> the data processing Maybe? > restricted retention period Prior restraint. > no data sharing off the premises 1000% prior restraint. In what world is this not abridging the freedom of the press? Good luck.

> Good luck.

Thanks!