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

Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

evanstonroundtable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 277 posts

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#111

Post by potato3732842 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #103
potato3732842 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Licesne plates were never intended to be recorded all the time to create a data set of who went where when. They were so that in the non-standard case where something other than "business as usual" has happened an owner could be identified.

You're right, of course, but the real issue is the lack of corporate accountability, and data stewardship. Since HN has a lot of folks that really don't want people talking about corporate accountability, the discussions are pretty much guaranteed to devolve into macguffins. Case in point: notice how fast this discussion will dive off the front page. Happens quite frequently, when the topic is one that makes certain…

Because having the .gov build and maintain the lists would be so much better?

The problem isn't that "evil capitalists are doing the thing" it's that anyone is doing the thing.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#112

Post by Yeul »

trhway wrote: post #75
euroderf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most likely the feds said they will tie up whoever challenges them in federal court. They can play jurisdiction fuck fuck games and then flip between it being a search, it being necessary for safety, that the city/county was obstruction a federal investigation, and all other nonsense. This sounds like some sort of legal procedures adopted from the USSR.

It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

This mode of operation is completely the reverse of my country the Netherlands.

In Dutch society it doesn't really matter who the current ruling party is the big machine keeps rolling on. The names change frequently- governments keep tumbling down- but every day like clockwork people get up in the morning, go to work and follow their programming. Prime minister A is replaced by prime minister B.

In some ways having a personality cult is less scary. You can kill a man but how do you destroy a collective?

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#113

Post by hopelite »

IlikeKitties wrote: post #19
privatelypublic wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firing projectiles to destroy cameras (it doesn't matter how the slug is thrown) is... oh why bother, people won't change. spray-chalk on a stick.

But airguns are usually much less regulated, much quieter and easier to supress and the legal liability for firing an airgun somewhere vs a firearm is usually much different. And they usually have enough power for that purpose without risking too much colleteral damage.

I don’t even think an airgun could really have an effect, but for anyone contemplating this kind of thing, please at least deconstruct the device and put it into something different looking. There is no point in getting offed with impunity by some Idiocracy goon because he saw a finger gun.

Better use of one’s efforts could be to support legal challenges of this clearly unconstitutional mass surveillance by the government through its corporate, or in this case, YC cutouts.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#114

Post by IlikeKitties »

hopelite wrote: post #113
IlikeKitties wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But airguns are usually much less regulated, much quieter and easier to supress and the legal liability for firing an airgun somewhere vs a firearm is usually much different. And they usually have enough power for that purpose without risking too much colleteral damage.

I don’t even think an airgun could really have an effect, but for anyone contemplating this kind of thing, please at least deconstruct the device and put it into something different looking. There is no point in getting offed with impunity by some Idiocracy goon because he saw a finger gun. Better use of one’s efforts could be to support legal challenges of this clearly unconstitutional mass surveillance by the gover…

There are airguns available otc with the power equal to roughly a 45 ACP fired from a pistol. I doubt these cameras can resist that.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#115

Post by Cheer2171 »

potato3732842 wrote: post #96
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

Is there a good public list of Flock Safety cities? Would be particularly interesting to see where they are in blue states.

>Would be particularly interesting to see where they are in blue states The answer is going to be "the snooty inner ring suburbs and wealthy rural-ish commuter communities that already had overstaffed PDs harassing teenagers"

https://deflock.me/map

Check your assumptions, the Bay Area and LA are littered with them. They're in Berkeley for fucks sake.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#116

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

potato3732842 wrote: post #97
SlightlyLeftPad wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No that’s vandalism, what you do is get a nice printout of the exact view the camera has and just plop it in front of the thing, like a for sale sign or something. Tape if you have to.

Engaging official channels instantly gets you on a list. These institutions aren't stupid, they're evil. Easier to just back a trailer into it or something. And if some scrappers haul the downed pole off a week after that you didn't see them. Furthermore, it's beyond naive to care about whether it's technically vandalism. You can't beat the establishment within the law because the establishment makes the law.

In theory, constitutional rights would be the ideal tool of choice on your second point. Of course that requires a civil suit against the state and really expensive attorneys.

To add to your point, it’s naive to believe that those protections are effective for anyone who isn’t incredibly wealthy at this point. The issue is most people can’t afford to take a case all the way, let alone start one.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#117

Post by ActionHank »

donmcronald wrote: post #8

Even though it's become commonplace in the last 20 years, I'm still shocked to see how companies can pretty much ignore the law, do whatever they want, and have everyone involved shielded from any kind of significant consequences. In situations like this, I think the person at the top of the chain that told employees to perform the illegal installations should be arrested and charged. On top of that, the company shou…

It was a mistake to treat corporations as the legal person responsible for these things. The officers of the corporations should be held legally responsible for breaking the law.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#118

Post by blooalien »

Wololooo wrote: post #82
trhway wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

And if I'd have to wager anyone that dare speaking out would be labelled antifa, therefore a terrorist, therefore free for all from a law enforcement perspective... Things are going downhill at an impressive pace... Not going to lie watching the Trainwreck in slow motion is entertaining in a sort of morbid way. Though I wished that it wouldn't go that way...

> "watching the Trainwreck in slow motion"

I only wish the train-wreck were in "slow motion" so there'd be a bit more time to take some meaningful actions as opposed to piling manufactured crises atop one another (and another, and another) in rapid succession as is currently happening.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#119

Post by blooalien »

Yeul wrote: post #112
trhway wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

This mode of operation is completely the reverse of my country the Netherlands. In Dutch society it doesn't really matter who the current ruling party is the big machine keeps rolling on. The names change frequently- governments keep tumbling down- but every day like clockwork people get up in the morning, go to work and follow their programming. Prime minister A is replaced by prime minister B. In some ways having a…

> "In some ways having a personality cult is less scary. You can kill a man but how do you destroy a collective?"

In some ways it's far more terrifying, because of the operative word "cult" there. Sometimes the object of such a "personality cult" can attract the mindset of an actual cult to form around them and create a highly destructive and dangerous "collective". It's happened many times already throughout recorded history, and it never really seems to go all that well for anyone involved.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#120

Post by throw0101c »

trhway wrote: post #75
euroderf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most likely the feds said they will tie up whoever challenges them in federal court. They can play jurisdiction fuck fuck games and then flip between it being a search, it being necessary for safety, that the city/county was obstruction a federal investigation, and all other nonsense. This sounds like some sort of legal procedures adopted from the USSR.

It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

> It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin.

“For my friends everything, for my enemies the law.” — Oscar R. Benavides, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Óscar_R._Benavides

Post reply on HN