Earlier quoted context omitted.
What else could make life safer at a realistic cost for people outside of vehicles?
Where I live, the speed limit keeps getting reduced so the city can make money off of fines, especially because nobody follows speed limits that are ridiculously low for wide, straight roads where following the limit would make traffic ground to a halt.
Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
161–170 of 321 posts
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#162Of course, actual serious criminals who are actively committing serious crimes just use fake plates so they aren't affected, it only really helps catch people who commit crimes on the spur of the moment (while also obviously eroding every "normal" person's privacy)
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Drones with a paintball gun attached? Realistically that’s going to attract a lot of negative attention.
The use of a drone also ups the ante from a prosecutor’s perspective. Charging a vandal caught with a paintbrush and a ladder is nothing out of the ordinary. A routine misdemeanor. Someone who has the wherewithal to jerry rig a paintball gun to a drone is someone scary . Plus, any officer who witnesses such a drone is almost certainly going to misidentify the paintball gun as an actual gun. I can imagine the operator…
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#164I'm surprised the flock cameras aren't being disabled in a more subtle fashion. All it takes is a tiny drone with a stick attached, and at the end of that stick is a tiny sponge soaked with tempera paint. Drone goes 'boop' on the camera lens, and the entire system is disabled until an expensive technician drives out with a ladder and cleans the lens at non-trivial expense. A handful of enterprising activists could bl…
Maybe some spray foam?
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
A paintball gun might not invoke the federal government to hunt you down; an over-powered laser absolutely will. The FAA has a very low tolerance for that sort of thing. Do not ever, ever, ever use lasers in open air that are capable of damaging the human retina without the appropriate licenses. The last thing cities need right now is another federal agency going on a witchhunt. Firing eye-damaging lasers into the ai…
The CCDs in cameras can be damaged with low-power lasers, or so I thought. No need for anything crazy. And the FAA won't become involved unless you're pointing them skyward. Pointing them across the street, or anywhere not visible from the air isn't going to sic federal agencies on you.
The point here is that 'skyward' is where the laser's beam goes when you're trying to aim it at a camera up on a pole. It's practically impossible to point a non-fixed position laser at something a non-trivial distance higher than you without spilling a large amount of laser beam into whatever happens to be behind your intended target; which is very often the sky.
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
The goal here by activists isn't to directly physically disarm every camera. Like with any act of protest, it's at least as much about the optics and influence of public opinion. Visibly destroying the units is more cathartic and spreads the message of displeasure better. Ultimately what needs to change is public perception and policy.
That poor printer in Office Space…
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#167Here's a list of Flock's investors: - Andreessen Horowitz - Greenoaks Capital - Bedrock Capital - Meritech Capital - Matrix Partners - Sands Capital - Founders Fund - Kleiner Perkins - Tiger Global - Y Combinator
Pretty clear already that Ycombinator runs this very site as a community fueled decoy for their actual values (or complete lack thereof).
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reflections are a concern regarding bystanders' eye safety, be safe.
What is the threshold for eye vs sensor damage and am I correct in assuming that duration is a factor. Basically less juice for a longer duration ruins a sensor but humans blink? For science.
Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#169Re: Across the US, people are dismantling and destroying Flock surveillance cameras
#170Is funny reading this from the UK because this ship sailed here years ago, you just have to assume if you drive a car anywhere except small roads in the countryside you are potentially being tracked by ANPR. Of course, actual serious criminals who are actively committing serious crimes just use fake plates so they aren't affected, it only really helps catch people who commit crimes on the spur of the moment (while al…