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

161–170 of 277 posts

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#161

Post by stavros »

renewiltord wrote: post #159
stavros wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And do you think it's the city here that's expressing the will of the majority of city inhabitants, or the federal government?

I think that just like Luigi Mangione acted against the law to do a thing that he wanted and lots of people think that's fine; you should be unsurprised that Flock is acting against the law to a do a thing that they want. If you condone violation of the law, it will become commonplace. Acting like your violations of the law are fine but others' violations of the law aren't fine is a position you can take but consider…

The law isn't a thing that was handed down from the heavens on stone tablets, it should reflect the will of the majority. What Mangione did is something that the majority wanted, or at least was fine with. What Flock did wasn't. It's as simple as that.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#162

Post by grayhatter »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #160
grayhatter wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. Authotrized agents from government show up and demand that I turn over video they call evidence. Then then suggest that I should continue to record video and that I should also enable audio recording too. I comply with all 3 requests. Later the court rules that original request was an illegal search and seizure, and that no re…

The sentence "I should record audio and video in this case and elects to reject a qualified immunity claim." is English but not even comprehensible. I have no idea what you mean. Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant"

Yeah, phone artifact, sorry about that. let me try to fix it.

Edited the original comment, hope that's better?

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#163

Post by grayhatter »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #160
grayhatter wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. Authotrized agents from government show up and demand that I turn over video they call evidence. Then then suggest that I should continue to record video and that I should also enable audio recording too. I comply with all 3 requests. Later the court rules that original request was an illegal search and seizure, and that no re…

The sentence "I should record audio and video in this case and elects to reject a qualified immunity claim." is English but not even comprehensible. I have no idea what you mean. Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant"

> Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant"

Citing Wikipedia

> He claimed in court, with documentation, that his was the only company to demand legal authority for surreptitious mass surveillance demanded by the NSA

Sounds like he would agree with me? Or do you mean how he was convicted of insider trading which appears to be unethical retaliation for resisting an illegal request?

I refuse to advocate that anyone should act unethically because they fear retaliation. whether or not it's the prudent decision, I'm too much of a pedant with low self-preservation instincts to behave in such a despicable way.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#164

Post by lurk2 »

saubeidl wrote: post #81
_cenw wrote: post #54

Aside the topic, but I wonder how HN, as a community, and as a moderation team, weighs this on the intellectual curiosity vs primarily politics scale. This seems politics to me. Very important politics that a lot of people in tech have a special interest for, but politics nonetheless, and much more pressing topics seem to be absent through the on-topic rule.

That rule is ... kind of nonsense anyways. One can't be intellectually curious and not think about politics. Politics is applied intellectual curiosity.

[flagged]

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#165

Post by serbuvlad »

grayhatter wrote: post #157
serbuvlad wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, I think that this instinct to fine-'em, screw-'em, etc. is profoundly authoritarian. It is extremely important for a civil society not only that predictable laws are put into place, but also that predictable enforcement of those laws exist. I jaywalk almost every day. I understand that if a cop sees me jaywalk, he will fine me. I also understand that if the cop wants to put me in jail for jaywalking, he…

You don't deserve the down votes you're getting for this clearly thoughtful comment. You're wrong in a number of ways, and to me it reads like an unintentionally shallow take, built up more from cliches over deeper understanding. But it's still well above average or engagement and insight of the average HN comment, thank you for writing it. > First of all, I think that this instinct to fine-'em, screw-'em, etc. is pr…

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

Unfortunately, my comment was simply not a defense of the company, since I know little about the situation, nor was it an attack on the city's actions. It was a reply to the comment I was responding too, which voiced a call to "lock 'em up" and punish them more, which I see all too often.

I certainly do not support government surveillance for any reason.

My comment was a defense of the legal proceedings as-we-have-them, in which the city issues a cease-and-desist, the company ignores it, the problem persists for a while, litigation start, the city demand a court order etc. And in the end the company is massively screwed, if they were wrong.

The alternative is simply that city decides, and the company is forced to follow.

The problem is procedural and structural, not consequentialist.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#166

Post by mindslight »

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…

This is one of the exact frustrations that has led the US to our current open fascism, so try not to take your state of affairs for granted. It's much easier to resist and avoid a bureaucracy (as it mostly operates on predictable rules), than a cult of personality autocrat who chooses new targets by the week.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#167

Post by saubeidl »

lurk2 wrote: post #164
saubeidl wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That rule is ... kind of nonsense anyways. One can't be intellectually curious and not think about politics. Politics is applied intellectual curiosity.

[flagged]

I'm sorry you feel that way, but it seems kind of crappy of you to devolve into personal attacks. Be better.

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#168

Post by toephu2 »

r2_pilot wrote: post #104
Animats wrote: post #47

There's a Flock camera at the end of my driveway. I'm next to a city line, so it's a reasonable location. I wonder if I can file a CCPA request and get a list of my comings and goings.

I'm basically in the same boat. There is no practical way for me to avoid having my picture taken 6 or more times every single day. I flip the camera off each and every time I drive/walk by it. It's infuriating.

Why do you care if you're not doing anything illegal?

Re: Evanston orders Flock to remove reinstalled cameras

#170

Post by tlavoie »

boston_clone wrote: post #50
Animats wrote: post #47

There's a Flock camera at the end of my driveway. I'm next to a city line, so it's a reasonable location. I wonder if I can file a CCPA request and get a list of my comings and goings.

…or someone could knock the damn thing offline.

It's almost like battery-powered angle grinders should be regular items in the neighbourhood tool lending library.
Post reply on HN