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

Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

wltx.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 166 posts

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#101

Post by ben_w »

Angostura wrote: post #100
ben_w wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's covered by "system has to be radically changed". UK driving licences give you room for 12 "penalty points" worth of mistakes before you risk being banned from the road, of which speeding costs you at least 3: https://www.gov.uk/penalty-points-endorsements/endorsement-c...

Indeed. 4 strikes and you are out seems fine to me (as a UK driver). You can also opt to take a speed awareness course in leu of the points, I believe

4 strikes today with current speed enforcement is fine; 4 strikes in a hypothetical where 100% of infractions are caught, I aver will catch (almost) everyone who actually drives within a month.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#102

Post by clickety_clack »

egorfine wrote: post #52
ben_w wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with that, I do mind. Just as two trivial examples, even though neither affects me personally: The estimated number of heroin users in the UK exceeds the total prison population. The number of class-A drug users in the UK is estimated to be so high that if they actually followed the minimum sentencing guidelines for possession, it would cause a catastrophic economic disaster both from all the people no longer wo…

> Another example is road traffic law. Even just speeding offences, I think you probably catch everyone who actually drives in the UK, often enough that after a month the only people left allowed to drive would be people like me who don't even own a car. You don't have to strip the driving licenses. You should impose a fine and not an extremely painful one for starters. And then probably within less than a year the w…

The point he’s making that people violate the letter of the law in many, many small ways, and to prosecute people for all of them would be a crippling burden on both individuals and the economy.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#103

Post by filoeleven »

sneak wrote: post #40

I am less worried about Flock ALPR (which are aimed in the direction of traffic flow to read rear number plates) as I am about the THOUSANDS of facial recognition cameras installed in the last year in all four directions at nearly every intersection in southern Nevada and many many cities in southern California (LA notably excepted). These are mounted above the stoplights and aimed against traffic at stoplights to re…

Flock cameras are advertised as ALPR but have facial/vehicle/etc recognition systems running on them as well. You can see one panning up to track other people near the end of this Benn Jordan video on the cameras.

https://youtu.be/vU1-uiUlHTo

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#104

Post by toss1 »

neverkn0wsb357 wrote: post #20

I think the person requesting to access the data was doing the right thing and I agree with the judge’s ruling. The fact that they’re gonna shut it down, implies the scale of indiscriminate nature of data capture and the volume of data being captured. These cameras are popping up all over the nation and if people realize how much data is being captured and where that data is going (or who it’s being sold to) and how…

The judge is right, and should go even further.

This is data collected with public funds — our money — for public purposes.

Not only should it be available to any US resident by request, it should be public, as in in an online library, and any US resident without a criminal record should be able to get continuous access, not only a batch of records (yes, keep out anyone with a restraining order or any other crime).

It is our tax dollars, any of us should be able to do research on the data. Including watching the watchers. Where do the government employees go and when? Where do the Flock employees go, and when?

Or, if that kind of instantly-available stalking of anyone is too much of a risk, shut it down. Hard. All of it.

The real-world dynamics of the system is either 1) everybody's motions in public are public, or 2) it is a tool of a totalitarian state. There is no other option, and option 2 is intolerable in a free society.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#105

Post by cucumber3732842 »

Thorrez wrote: post #75
tsimionescu wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the speed limit is 65 mph, do they actually intend for everyone to go no faster? I don't think so. Where is this supposed ambiguity coming from?

Are you asking (1) why I think what I think? Or are you asking (2) how we wound up in this situation as a society? (1) I think what I think for several reasons. Basically everyone speeds. Probabilistically that includes he very lawmakers writing the laws, the police, and the road designers. I've also read some articles talking about road design, and in it it's mentioned that the designers factor in that most people w…

There were also fairly contiguous moral panics in the late 1960s (teenage boomers crashing muscle cars) 1970s (fuel use) and early 1980s (slightly older boomers driving drunk) that lead to the regulations being written far in excess of what there's popular support to enforce which is a huge contributor to why the enforcers and judiciary are essentially responsible for dialing it back to something that doesn't make the system look stupid.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#106

Post by catapart »

egorfine wrote: post #52
ben_w wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with that, I do mind. Just as two trivial examples, even though neither affects me personally: The estimated number of heroin users in the UK exceeds the total prison population. The number of class-A drug users in the UK is estimated to be so high that if they actually followed the minimum sentencing guidelines for possession, it would cause a catastrophic economic disaster both from all the people no longer wo…

> Another example is road traffic law. Even just speeding offences, I think you probably catch everyone who actually drives in the UK, often enough that after a month the only people left allowed to drive would be people like me who don't even own a car. You don't have to strip the driving licenses. You should impose a fine and not an extremely painful one for starters. And then probably within less than a year the w…

[flagged]

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#107

Post by JKCalhoun »

For reasons I have been unable to articulate, I have believed that if license plate readers are a thing, someone should open-source one that the general public could share.

When a comment comes back that someone malicious will use the tech to stalk someone I really have no answer for that. That is indefensibly a bad thing.

Of course the tech exists nonetheless (not open source as far as I know) and it could be argued it is even being used maliciously—or at least without the kind of judicial oversight we assumed would be in place. But one actor behaving badly does not justify the use of the tech by everyone.

I read about the citizens of Minneapolis using decidedly low-tech means to track ICE vehicles prowling their community and it suggested a scenario where an open license-plate-tracking solution could "balance the scales" a bit (that is if you believe the scales to be imbalanced).

I imagined not a license-plate reading dragnet but rather software where you had first to enter in very specific strings of ASCII characters and the software would only announce when there was a specific string match from the camera.

To that end I vibe-coded an app for iOS in about 15 minutes using iOS's Vision framework and the built-in phone camera. Anyone could do the same.

Nonetheless I only tested it with "HELLO" and "WORLD" using scraps of paper in my kitchen and never tried it outside as the craziness in Minneapolis seemed to have quieted down.

I moved on to other projects.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#108

Post by throwaway85825 »

neverkn0wsb357 wrote: post #20

I think the person requesting to access the data was doing the right thing and I agree with the judge’s ruling. The fact that they’re gonna shut it down, implies the scale of indiscriminate nature of data capture and the volume of data being captured. These cameras are popping up all over the nation and if people realize how much data is being captured and where that data is going (or who it’s being sold to) and how…

Public traffic cams have existed for a while. I don't think anyone would complain as much if the ALPR feed was public. Politicians and government officials want to use surveillance as a means of control not to benefit the public and that's what galls people.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#109

Post by throwaway173738 »

SlightlyLeftPad wrote: post #10
timschmidt wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if they had nothing to hide... /s

> “We were very disappointed,” Franklin said. “That means perpetrators of crime, people who are maybe engaged in domestic abuse or stalkers, they can request footage and that could cause a lot of harm.” No concern over the dozens (or hundreds?) of cases of police or government employees themselves doing exactly what they’re afraid of here. Strange.

They know, but if they acknowledge it it would make some people mad. Anyone who works with or it’s associated with ALPR knows why you have to have audit logging and access controls if you give law enforcement access to it.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#110

Post by throwaway173738 »

randallsquared wrote: post #98
SlightlyLeftPad wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “We were very disappointed,” Franklin said. “That means perpetrators of crime, people who are maybe engaged in domestic abuse or stalkers, they can request footage and that could cause a lot of harm.” No concern over the dozens (or hundreds?) of cases of police or government employees themselves doing exactly what they’re afraid of here. Strange.

> No concern over [...] government employees themselves Three paragraphs later someone else is paraphrased as including immigration enforcement agents among the problematic users, and in the current political environment, federal law enforcement being made more effective might be the real problem for state and local government.

State and Local LE are also worrying. It’s common enough that they use these systems to stalk exes and such.
Post reply on HN