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

Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

guessingheadlights.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 250 posts

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#151

Post by 0x457 »

actionfromafar wrote: post #130
M3L0NM4N wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For successful policing*. Which everyone should be for. edit: Every single thing you guys have replied with are policy/law debates, not enforcement debates. I disagree with many laws on the books today. I want the laws changed, not selective/arbitrary enforcement of them.

Perfekt enforcement never existed and our current laws were written for a reality where that was an impossibility. Not considering second order effects is reckless IMHO.

Turns out if you let private company do it, then its totally possible and constitutional.

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#152

Post by daedrdev »

shimman wrote: post #45
Animats wrote: post #19

That's not a Flock error. That's a law enforcement error. Flock isn't responsible for a bogus warrant in the system. The woman probably has a good case for damages from the police department for doing it twice. That's sloppy police work.

No this is bad logic. Flock is absolutely responsible and they should not be releasing or selling products that are this poorly made. Saying that the responsibility is only on the user is extremely myopic. It's also dismissing the role Flock has in how they make and design their software. If they can't handle this maybe they should be disbanded as a company or nationalized for better public control.

Them is flock responsible for reducing auto thefts and should be counted too?

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#153

Post by kittoes »

M3L0NM4N wrote: post #101
kittoes wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does this always have to be binary when any amount of gun control is suggested? It's simple math: if me didn't manufacture so many guns and didn't make them so readily available then there will inherently be less danger... this isn't even debatable!

That is obviously true... but also a fairy tale hypothetical, and we are in the real world. So the question is, what's the solution, right now? Not 200 years ago.

A fairy tale? The UK, Australia, and Brazil all have something to say about that claim. In developed countries, the United States is an extreme outlier so why pretend this is a completely unapproachable problem?

Our constitution itself gives us a blueprint because it states, in no uncertain terms, a "well-regulated militia"; not "each individual citizen".

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#154

Post by Barbing »

skinfaxi wrote: post #117
Barbing wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you assume 1 in 100 are going to be dangerous? Only rarely does the driver say “I’m not going back to jail!“ when they have warrants out. If you inspect rollercoasters I figure you could probably be pretty lackadaisical on the average inspection. If you don’t take each one deadly seriously though and there’s no way of knowing when it’s important to, maybe it comes flying off the track, so you follow your chec…

When in enemy territory, the military looks at civilian populations as potential enemy combatants. Police are not supposed to view everyone this way as they are in their communities and not enemy territory.

It’s both unfortunate police are trained with videos of cops approaching motorists and getting filled with bullets, and unfortunate those are real situations. I wish there were a way to guarantee officer safety so you didn’t have to tell them “domestic violence incidents and traffic stops should scare you” (most dangerous police situations IIRC).

You reminded me of a salient line in BSG:

  “There’s a reason you separate the military and the police. One fights the enemy of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people.”
-Adama, Battlestar Galactica

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#156

Post by cwillu »

WillAdams wrote: post #126
petscoop wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should I be in favor of 100% successful policing? I don't accept the premise that all de facto law should be in line with de jure law. That sort of society is unprecedented

The one official statement I have ever seen on that was when a new Base Commander was being interviewed and was asked, "Will there be a quota on the number of speeding tickets issued by the Security Police on base?" and his response was, "Absolutely, and it will be 100% --- I expect all instances of speeding and other traffic violations which endanger public safety to caught and ticketed --- such disregard of regulat…

And that's fine (ish) when the centralized authoritarian socialist organization consists solely of members who joined voluntarily.

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#157

Post by throw0101d »

scottLobster wrote: post #119
throw0101d wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I try to explain that in the USA, the ratio of guns to people is far above 1:1. Therefore, if I was a police officer approaching any car, I would assume that the driver had a gun. Except that majority of households (58%) do not have a firearm: * https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts... and when it comes to individuals, it is the majority (70%) that do not own one. The numbers are 'skewed' by…

Uh, if you had a 30% chance of encountering an armed individual as a cop, you'd damn well assume they were armed every time. That's one in three traffic stops, and you probably do a lot more than three as a cop. Keep in mind that number will be a lot higher depending on your locality. If I'm ever elected God Emperor of the United States I'm going to make beating XCOM 2 a high school graduation requirement just to imp…

> Uh, if you had a 30% chance of encountering an armed individual as a cop, you'd damn well assume they were armed every time.

I understand that thinking (see also 'would you play Russian roulette with those odds?'), but the "(>)1:1" comments hides the underlying distribution, which I think colours how people think about the (alleged) pervasiveness of firearms in the US.

As another example of perception versus reality, most people probably don't think of Canada as 'gun country', but we're in the top ten per capita (probably because of the history/culture of hunting up here):

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g...

And if you're going to teach people about odds and statistics, perhaps it will help people understand that guns tend to make people's homes less safe:

* https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2013/03/guns-in-homes-a...

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#159

Post by genewitch »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #140
lukan wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Flock is absolutely responsible and they should not be releasing or selling products that are this poorly made." I am not a fan of flock, nor police surveillance state, but what could they have done better here? "Milwaukee police later admitted the alert should have been cleared out of the system days earlier, but an employee simply forgot to remove it. " The system seemed to work as intended - that numberplate was…

> I am not a fan of flock, nor police surveillance state, but what could they have done better here? Flock should stop existing. I hope people help them with that, enthusiastically.

don't worry, Axon wants to put all 90,000 CCTV cameras into a database for dragnets, too. And i'm sure there will be startups, possibly even mentioned here, that want the same thing.

There's a lot of money in cyberstalking and real stalking. see: Facebook's valuation

Re: Woman pulled over twice after Flock-linked software connected her to homicide

#160

Post by FrustratedMonky »

sterlind wrote: post #141
Xirdus wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the Trump presidency has conclusively proved the "imagine if your opponent was in power" argument doesn't work. Everybody says Trump should be impeached, nobody says the office of the president should be deprived of the powers Trump used to do the things he should be impeached for.

> Everybody says Trump should be impeached, nobody says the office of the president should be deprived of the powers Trump used to do the things he should be impeached for. I've been shouting this from the mountaintops.

Not that many people on the mountain. Shout it at the McDonalds. Of course, you'll be arrested.
Post reply on HN