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

21–30 of 248 posts

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

#21

Post by Someone1234 »

nemomarx wrote: post #9

Why did they need to have guns drawn and that many cops, even if the flag had been correct? A car involved in a homicide investigation doesn't mean it's even being driven by the suspect. It's not a positive ID at all

Same reason why so called "Swatting" is largely a non-issue outside the US: Police in the US are trained to respond to the hilt by default, and then lower their heavy-handed response later if they warrant it. Contrast that with most other countries, where police are trained to respond and only escalate based on the findings/as the situation unfolds.

This training is supposedly for "officer safety." But being a police officer in the US isn't even in the top-10 most dangerous fields, and the vast majority of deaths are from traffic accidents or health issues while on the job (e.g. heart attack/stroke), not gun-related. So it is more likely a cultural issue within the profession.

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

#22

Post by bell-cot »

Simulacra wrote: post #6
Tostino wrote: post #5

I just spoke at my county commission meeting this morning, against these cameras, as they're debating putting 50% more cameras up across the county. The original set went up without any news coverage or fanfare. https://www.youtube.com/live/1OmEmpL-7qY?t=720&is=z_mb9ZEVCs... Looks like I have two serious opponents to privacy on the commission to deal with, and the commissioner seems to at least want to end the contra…

Have you thought about running against them? Go get the paperwork, stand out in front of the post office and collect signatures.

When's the next election for county commissioners, where are candidates running against them likely to come from, and is there any local vibe on the issue?

Running yourself would be a whole lotta work. Fear that they'll soon be out of office should be ample incentive for the anti-privacy commissioners to suffer sudden changes of heart. Or if not - are there any energetic local reporters, who might dig up some evidence of Flock greasing palms?

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

#23

Post by M3L0NM4N »

nemomarx wrote: post #9

Why did they need to have guns drawn and that many cops, even if the flag had been correct? A car involved in a homicide investigation doesn't mean it's even being driven by the suspect. It's not a positive ID at all

I think the police should especially have guns drawn if they are pulling over a car owned by a murder suspect. It is reasonable enough to assume the driver is the suspect. If they PID the driver as not the suspect, holster up, no problem. Police always have guns drawn for any felony stop as an officer safety precaution, no reason to not when you have a high risk suspect.

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

#24

Post by M3L0NM4N »

Someone1234 wrote: post #21
nemomarx wrote: post #9

Why did they need to have guns drawn and that many cops, even if the flag had been correct? A car involved in a homicide investigation doesn't mean it's even being driven by the suspect. It's not a positive ID at all

Same reason why so called "Swatting" is largely a non-issue outside the US: Police in the US are trained to respond to the hilt by default, and then lower their heavy-handed response later if they warrant it. Contrast that with most other countries, where police are trained to respond and only escalate based on the findings/as the situation unfolds. This training is supposedly for "officer safety." But being a police…

Police in the US should respond to the hilt because the likelihood of the suspect being armed is significantly higher than any other country...

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

#25

Post by M3L0NM4N »

VariousPrograms wrote: post #13

The inaccuracy of our omniscient AI surveillance network isn't why I'm against it. The conclusion of this article is that we need more humans in the loop for a successful police state.

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.

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

#26

Post by giantg2 »

nemomarx wrote: post #9

Why did they need to have guns drawn and that many cops, even if the flag had been correct? A car involved in a homicide investigation doesn't mean it's even being driven by the suspect. It's not a positive ID at all

Not to mention fake and stolen plates are a thing.

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

#27

Post by quietsegfault »

M3L0NM4N wrote: post #24
Someone1234 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same reason why so called "Swatting" is largely a non-issue outside the US: Police in the US are trained to respond to the hilt by default, and then lower their heavy-handed response later if they warrant it. Contrast that with most other countries, where police are trained to respond and only escalate based on the findings/as the situation unfolds. This training is supposedly for "officer safety." But being a police…

Police in the US should respond to the hilt because the likelihood of the suspect being armed is significantly higher than any other country...

If it’s so dangerous, perhaps we should find a way to better control the danger of firearms.

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

#28

Post by dylan604 »

joshstrange wrote: post #7

> Technology is supposed to make police work faster and safer. Not sure I agree with the premise... > Most of the time it does. Citation needed > But every so often, a computer system hiccups, and an ordinary person ends up staring down the barrel of a gun for no reason at all. "Aww shucks, you know, bugs happen and sometimes guns get pointed at people because of them". Pardon my language but: What the actual fuck? H…

>> But every so often, a computer system hiccups, and an ordinary person ends up staring down the barrel of a gun for no reason at all.

> "Aww shucks, you know, bugs happen and sometimes guns get pointed at people because of them". Pardon my language but: What the actual fuck? How does a site write that with a straight face?

At the end of the day, the worst bug I could write might delete an object from a bucket. No bug I create will ever cause physical harm or death to the end user or anyone. No bug I create will ever cause a medical device to give erroneous results causing a patient to be misdiagnosed. This is by design. I don't want to ever be responsible for anything like that. Do people working on these kinds of products just dissociate their work from the potential negative effect their work could have?

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

#29

Post by jMyles »

The institution of police has run its course and is time to deprecate.

Flock cameras... I mean, look: our society, without any central organization at all, has the capacity to record nearly every crime that occurs, just by dint of our camera phones and private surveillance systems. So Flock really just gives the police more information, creating a an asymmetry with the rest of society.

Given that we can already record all that we need to, and call for help from each other at a moment's notice, what good can police do for the next few centuries? And what possible hope is there that it will outweigh the bad?

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

#30

Post by nphardon »

Tostino wrote: post #5

I just spoke at my county commission meeting this morning, against these cameras, as they're debating putting 50% more cameras up across the county. The original set went up without any news coverage or fanfare. https://www.youtube.com/live/1OmEmpL-7qY?t=720&is=z_mb9ZEVCs... Looks like I have two serious opponents to privacy on the commission to deal with, and the commissioner seems to at least want to end the contra…

1) I love your argument, and I'm really impressed you were able to step up and do this. 2) It's wild that you, and everyone else, broadcast your name and address on live cam, while also arguing against the surveillance state.
Post reply on HN