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

Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 466 posts

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#201

Post by bko »

ga_to wrote: post #165
bko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about your exp w government agencies, but in my experience, I much prefer private companies. Much easier to hold to account. Just as an example, NYC mayor is going after landlords for violations and tenant rights. He has hearings regularly. However there is no enforcement of the law when it comes to government owned housing projects, which are very often not kept up to code and are outright dangerously m…

What big-tech companies have been _actually_ held accountable for data misuse, as in, 'consequences that actually mattered'? Being able to absorb fines just turns them into a cost-of-doing-business tax.

Billions in fines is at least an incentive to invest in measures to prevent data leaks or misuse.

For instance, in July 2026 the D.C. Department of Health Care Finance discovered that two reports published on its own website contained hidden underlying personal data that unauthorized users could access. The reports were supposed to show aggregate statistics, but the accessible data could include Medicaid IDs, birth dates, provider names, race, gender, ward, and ethnicity. The exposure potentially existed from 2023 until July 2026.

Do you want to guess how many billions in fines or people were fired due to the leak?

https://dhcf.dc.gov/page/dhcf-data-incident

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#203

Post by berytos_storm »

Planktonne wrote: post #69
GardenLetter27 wrote: post #20

Good. It helps solve crimes, and can even resolve general anti-social behaviour. I'd rather have the cameras than have family members die to drugged up drivers, or robbers get away with their crimes.

It's not clear that it actually does help solve crimes. It might even exacerbate them. There's been a lot of stalking enabled by Flock cameras.

Too many cops are fat lazy and retarded. Seriously it’s disgusting how fat some of them are. Not even sure how they do their job.

Anyway the fat lazy fucks hate work. And before dragnet surveillance they had to do work to solve crimes.

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#204

Post by harimau777 »

bko wrote: post #174
harimau777 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly not, but even that would be better than unaccountable corporations having the tech.

Corporations are more accountable than government agencies. A government agency can switch vendors or you can drag their CEOs in front of Congress. Try that with some internal bureaucrat in an agency you've never heard of.

Leaders of departments (i.e. the government equivalent of a CEO) are dragged in front of congress all the time.

The government at least has a theoretical obligation to promote the public good. It isn't much but it's better than corporations whose only obligation is the shareholders.

The government is also subject to safeguards like freedom of infermation requests which level the playingfield somewhat.

I'm not saying that the government is good. I'm just saying that corporations are much worse.

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#206

Post by Lord-Jobo »

none2585 wrote: post #80
furyg3 wrote: post #46

It's pretty clear to be that governments shouldn't be able to 'subcontract' their way out of the limits placed on them via the constitution. Thankfully the supreme court seems to agree here in two ways: 1) Just because a third party (Google in Chatrie case but Flock here) collects the data and the government requests it from them, doesn't mean that that isn't a 'search' which requires a warrant ("obtaining someone's…

> Thankfully the supreme court seems to agree here in two ways I'm sure we're a golden statue or private jet away from the supreme court having a change of heart there.

It’s called a deluxe motor-coach and it’s the most important currency in our democracy, apparently.

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#207

Post by Nevermark »

harporoeder wrote: post #83
furyg3 wrote: post #46

It's pretty clear to be that governments shouldn't be able to 'subcontract' their way out of the limits placed on them via the constitution. Thankfully the supreme court seems to agree here in two ways: 1) Just because a third party (Google in Chatrie case but Flock here) collects the data and the government requests it from them, doesn't mean that that isn't a 'search' which requires a warrant ("obtaining someone's…

There is not generally an expectation of privacy in public. Things in public can be recorded without consent. Filming a car on a street and giving that video to the government is not the same as me giving private information to a third party, and then them giving it to the government such as Carpenter v United states covers. Edit: Note that this is not an endorsement, rather stating that recent supreme court cases ma…

> There is not generally an expectation of privacy in public.

Which is entirely different from an expectation of a generalized systematic loss of practical privacy in public.

They are not even close to the same thing.

The willingness to kneel to others baffles me. Loss of practical privacy is loss of power - to somebody(s). It may not seem so for one person. But when it is true for everyone, the system will adapt to using that power.

Throw in AI and data integration. This is clearly a B.A.D. idea.

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#208

Post by bparsons »

harporoeder wrote: post #83
furyg3 wrote: post #46

It's pretty clear to be that governments shouldn't be able to 'subcontract' their way out of the limits placed on them via the constitution. Thankfully the supreme court seems to agree here in two ways: 1) Just because a third party (Google in Chatrie case but Flock here) collects the data and the government requests it from them, doesn't mean that that isn't a 'search' which requires a warrant ("obtaining someone's…

There is not generally an expectation of privacy in public. Things in public can be recorded without consent. Filming a car on a street and giving that video to the government is not the same as me giving private information to a third party, and then them giving it to the government such as Carpenter v United states covers. Edit: Note that this is not an endorsement, rather stating that recent supreme court cases ma…

Without any real privacy laws, Americans should not have the expectation of privacy in private spaces either. Your search history, real time location, biometric data, consumer habits etc. are all for sale to anyone who wants it.

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#209

Post by StopTheBS »

quacked wrote: post #30

I've been very pleased to see the reaction to Flock in the US. I was talking to a younger guy, very normal kid who keeps his nose clean, studying criminal justice in his junior year at college. I jokingly mentioned to him that maybe he could bring some anti-surveillance awareness to whatever law enforcement agency he goes to work for and he said, very seriously, "oh yeah, definitely. I've only gotten two cameras so f…

Were you very pleased to know Flock is a YC company and HN helps them lie

Re: Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit

#210

Post by ceejayoz »

bko wrote: post #174
harimau777 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly not, but even that would be better than unaccountable corporations having the tech.

Corporations are more accountable than government agencies. A government agency can switch vendors or you can drag their CEOs in front of Congress. Try that with some internal bureaucrat in an agency you've never heard of.

> Try that with some internal bureaucrat in an agency you've never heard of.

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/hearings/testimony-of-anthony-f...

How many Americans had heard of internal bureaucrat Anthony Fauci and NIAID before 2020?

Post reply on HN