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

111–120 of 166 posts

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

#111

Post by throwaway173738 »

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…

The statute in Washington that allows these to be used to enforce speeds and signals also prohibited photographing the driver using another or the same camera.

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

#112

Post by cmckn »

Please contact your representative in Olympia and tell them to kill the bill that would exempt this footage from public record requests. It passed the Senate on Feb. 6.

This is the bill: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/?BillNumber=6002&Chamber=...

Find your reps: https://leg.wa.gov/legislators/

Washington State Legislative Hotline: 1-800-562-6000

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

#113

Post by jdechko »

nine_k wrote: post #57
egorfine wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

If speeding is not something that happens constantly, then a radar could detect the instances of speeding, and only turn on a camera when a speeding car is nearby. This would keep the majority of passing cars from being recorded, and would record the fewer cars the fewer drivers would be speeding.

How long until the AI estimates how fast you were going based on the time you were tagged at 2 cameras? The system says travel between these cameras should take 3 minutes. You made it in 2:45. No review, just a ticket in the mail.

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

#114

Post by jermaustin1 »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #107

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…

There had been a fairly decent open APLR library called OpenALPR. It used to be updated fairly regularly, but then was "acquired" and now sits abandoned for almost a decade without any updates, while the company that acquired it (REKOR) has commercialized it and extended it as a closed source API and platform.

ALPR is fairly trivial now days, and a modern CPU can process thousands of plates per second (dozens of plates per frame, hundreds of frames per second coming multiple cameras pointing at different lanes of traffic).

The "product" around all of these is linking the plates traveling together, tracking routes through various cameras, identifying common travel patterns, and more disturbing travel patterns that are outside norm for a given plate or route (i.e. do they normally drive these 3 cameras M-F, but this Th, they went a different route and stopped somewhere for a while).

All that used to be done by the police/detectives/investigators on their own. Now the AI is automating this, and that is truly terrifying, especially for how often misreads occur.

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

#115

Post by tln »

ben_w wrote: post #101
Angostura wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If notice of the infractions is a envelope delivered days later and sitting on on end table for a week, typical drivers are going to rack up 4 strikes before seeing the first one!

Perfect enforcement has to come with immediate feedback

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

#116

Post by naasking »

ben_w wrote: post #48
fc417fc802 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind a local AI on an airgapped security camera network monitoring a camera and issuing an alert to a security guard. The issues are internet connectivity, data retention/mining/sale, and non-local processing (ie handing stuff off to a third party that does who knows what and probably doesn't take security seriously).

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…

> The entire legal system has to be radically changed with far less punishments for almost everything if you have perfect, or even 30% of the way to perfect, surveillance.

Prosecutorial discretion means they can just collect evidence and choose not to charge you unless they want to leverage you for something. This already happens, but universal surveillance means it can literally happen to anybody, because everybody breaks the law in some way due to how many laws we have.

Discretion is the real problem I think. It seems extreme, but maybe discretion should be eliminated: if you commit a crime you will be charged. This will at first result in way too much prosecution, which will lead to protests and hopefully repealing laws and we'd end up in a better place where the law is understandable and predictable by mortals.

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

#117

Post by siffland »

My issues is with false arrests due to people blindly following AI. People pulled out of their cars are gunpoint due to the AI misreading a single letter on the plate, the lady who was arrested for stealing amazon packages just because flock saw her enter and exit a neighborhood and she had to get doorbell camera to prove her innocence.

Also i think it should be public record about every single point of data flock collects and retention period. I am not saying they have to release the data itself, but I want to know what my tax dollars are collecting, how long they are keeping it, who can access it and who they are selling, er i mean sharing it with.

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

#118

Post by rpdillon »

speleding wrote: post #73
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…

I'm going to argue the other side: in Chinese cities like Chongqing they've seen a drastic reduction in crime after blanketing the city with cameras and monitoring technology. Whole categories of crime disappeared. Women and elderly feel safe to walk the streets at night. No one locks their bike anymore in Chongqing. I care about privacy, but I think we should be smart enough to work out a way to get some of those be…

There's no way to deploy a system like the one you're describing without being abused for authoritarian overreach. It's simply a matter of time, and once it is deployed for authoritarian overreach, the only way back will be paid for in blood.

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

#119

Post by mylifeandtimes »

criddell wrote: post #99
manarth wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it's unclear what the lawmakers, road designers, and police intend" In many cases, there's a gap between the original intention and the current need. Many speed limits and policies were established in an era of fewer cars, but also much less capable cars with fewer safety features - many speed limits were established before the adoption of ABS, stability control and airbags, and more recent innovations in lane-keepi…

> Speed-limits typically remain grandfathered in at their original value That depends on where you are. In Texas, state highway speed limits are determined though a traffic study[1]. The monitor traffic for a while, then set the limit to the 85th percentile. People can use this to get out of speeding tickets. If you find that it's been a long time since a speed study was done on the road you were on, the judge might…

In other words, 15% of people are ALWAYS speeding, by definition.

So with perfect enforcement (punish everyone over the threshold), how do you enable an 85th percentile rule?

Post reply on HN