Live data from Hacker News

Stop Flock

stopflock.com

111–120 of 331 posts

Re: Stop Flock

#111
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would an effective immigration enforcement agency look like, in your opinion?

I think we can agree that when they're executing innocent citizens in the street, the agency is no longer effective.

[deleted]

Re: Stop Flock

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not being tracked at all times in real life. They're potentially being tracked in public . I get that some people have a desire for privacy in public. And I'm even sympathetic to it. However, with the exception of the EU, privacy in public not is a right, nor is it a thing most people believe they possess. (And even ECHR Article 8 has a carveout for recording public activities for legitimate purposes.) If you…

> They're potentially being tracked in public. In the film crew example, what is the difference if the crew is sufficiently far away from you such that you won't know? The paparazzi already do it to celebrities, seems reasonable for individuals to just track each other at a distance if we're all okay with your proposed path.

> seems reasonable for individuals to just track each other at a distance if we're all okay with your proposed path.

They often do. What am I gonna do, run up to anyone who's taking cell phone videos that might have me in it and try to force them to stop recording? That would make me look unhinged.

Re: Stop Flock

#113

I don't want to stop Flock the company. I want to stop Flock the business model, along with all the other mass surveillance, and the data brokers. If the business models can't be made illegal, it should at least come with liabilities so high that no sane business would want to hold data that is essentially toxic waste. Without that, we are quickly spiraling into the dystopia where privacy is gone, and when the wrong…

You want to stop the source, which is that the government and other agencies can purchase surveillance data that would otherwise be disallowed by the 4th amendment. We need to end this 'laundering' of information through third parties, and enforce the constitution by its intent.

100 miles around your border is a constitution free zone anyway.

Re: Stop Flock

#114
post #40

I am somewhat skeptical that either the ACLU or EFF are effective organizations for this cause. The ACLU in particular have drifted significantly from a civil liberties focus, and EFF's privacy track-record for corporate run surveillance has never been the best and of late they seem to be following the ACLU away from civil liberties.

There is an increasingly popular idea that all libertarianism, including civil libertianism, is inherently partisan and specifically right-wing. I think it has done a lot of damage to these organizations' ability to effectively fight this and other issues. I've shifted a lot of my support for ACLU/EFF towards IJ in recent years.

Re: Stop Flock

#115
post #27

We need a law that says if you hold any data about a person, they must be notified when anyone accesses it, including law enforcement. I used to work in criminal investigations. I understand how this might make investigation of real crime more difficult. But so does the fact that you need a warrant to enter someone's home, and yet we manage to investigate crime anyway. Your data should be an extension of your home, e…

> Your data should be an extension of your home, even if it's held by another company. Nice idea, but at least in the U.S. (with the lone exception of LE obtaining cell phone location records), courts have consistently held that if you give your data to someone else, you are no longer entitled to an expectation of privacy in it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_doctrine If you want your data to be considered…

Nice idea (2), but many companies and govt agencies force one to give lots of data or you will not be receiving services, sometimes very important services.

Re: Stop Flock

#116
post #32

Although I oppose the surveillance state, it's important to understand the motivations and incentives involved in the move toward Flock (and its eventual successors); until those are resolved, governments are going to be implementing Flock style programs with relatively tepid opposition. Police departments are seriously understaffed in many major cities, and officers are much less efficient than they used to be. This…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47124169

I've noted this in the age verification debate, and in the Android developer verification debate as well.

Just denying the tradeoffs isn't productive, if tradeoffs affect others, just pushing your position disregarding the tradeoffs as fake or not important is divisive. In actuality I think that both parties become incentivized to solve the problems of the other group of people too, but as a centrist that position often gets pushback from both sides who seem to collaborate only indirectly from a place of adversarial competition and good vs evil framing, which I think is less productive than just recognizing the conflict and negotiating, but perhaps it's more engaging...

Re: Stop Flock

#117
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would an effective immigration enforcement agency look like, in your opinion?

I think we can agree that when they're executing innocent citizens in the street, the agency is no longer effective.

I agree with you. What would an effective immigration enforcement agency look like?

Re: Stop Flock

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very common pattern; my university pushed through a ZeroEyes AI camera/open carry weapon detection contract within 2 weeks of a shooting at a nearby school, even though it’s trivial to bypass by hiding it; it’s most probably just (gruesome as it is to think about) a bad press insurance so if anything happened, they can say they had “state of the art AI detection” and they did all they could. No one wants to…

and then some kid gets tackled by a team of armed police when AI flags a bag of doritos as a gun. https://abc7.com/post/student-handcuffed-doritos-bag-mistake...

Yep, here they admitted there were local revolutionary war re-enactors who were falsely flagged (although thankfully they didn't let it get past the first flag).

Re: Stop Flock

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want to stop the source, which is that the government and other agencies can purchase surveillance data that would otherwise be disallowed by the 4th amendment. We need to end this 'laundering' of information through third parties, and enforce the constitution by its intent.

Not just the government. It shouldn't be possible for any random stalker to find someone's daily movements.

How is that achievable? PIs can legally do it. Random people can keep tabs on you and exchange gossip. It's the sudden scale and low cost that doesn't sit well with freedom to not be tracked in public 24/7 we took for granted.

Re: Stop Flock

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't want to stop Flock the company. I want to stop Flock the business model, along with all the other mass surveillance, and the data brokers. Then you want to stop the company. Which is reasonable.

Flock isn’t the only company.

One company getting destroyed could be a sign for others.
Post reply on HN