21–30 of 101 posts
I don't understand why a regular patrol officer would / should even have access to something like this without some level of extra authorization. They're not detectives running an open investigation ... In this case this officer was searching numerous networks over and over again, that alone should trigger some metrics that raise the question "uh ... why?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wonder how quick this will get removed off the front page YC’s an investor after all
That's not why these are getting flagged. The tech angle is very weak otherwise too similar to the ordinary news. It's not that we don't care or even disagree. I'm not saying this to stir an argument either. I'm just giving an honest answer why the rest of us ordinary folk flag these. They go into the same bin as most of the AI posts. As well, I can't speak for everyone, but the pushback replies to my comment here (i…
This is a crime that could not be committed without AI, the internet, and relatively inexpensive cameras using solar panels. It is a very tech oriented crime that could not be committed 30 years ago.
I don't see a connection to Flock specifically in this lovers' spat. If it wasn't Flock it would be any number of other things. This is a literally-who-cares incident that is being built up into something it isn't. It's like saying she drove a Ford police car during these activities therefore Ford is evil, QED. It's more worthy of discussion noting New Bedford is a shithole and the armpit of Mass.
Its a good example of those who say "surveillance systems can and will be used inappropriately" - a jilted lover cop with access is exactly the kind of irrational person who could do so. A person with a Ford can do all the things car owners can do. But very few people are trusted with access to ALPR cameras. So: I disagree. I have no qualms with New Bedford and I'm sure it has lots of, or even mostly, upright police…
New Bedford being a dump is a non-sequitur; it has as much connection and relevance to the incident as does Flock.
I don't understand why a regular patrol officer would / should even have access to something like this without some level of extra authorization. They're not detectives running an open investigation ... In this case this officer was searching numerous networks over and over again, that alone should trigger some metrics that raise the question "uh ... why?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a good example of those who say "surveillance systems can and will be used inappropriately" - a jilted lover cop with access is exactly the kind of irrational person who could do so. A person with a Ford can do all the things car owners can do. But very few people are trusted with access to ALPR cameras. So: I disagree. I have no qualms with New Bedford and I'm sure it has lots of, or even mostly, upright police…
The world is full of and depends on trusted people. You're attacking technology and tools rather than a person that abused their trust to the community. New Bedford being a dump is a non-sequitur; it has as much connection and relevance to the incident as does Flock.
I didn't bring up New Bedford.
I agree trust is good. I also believe Flock has implemented some auditing tool to flag frivolous searches which is why these cases are popping up.
I am not against trust, but verifying those who we trust are trustworthy is important, I think.
It was only about an hour ago I saw yet another mindless commentator on one of these threads saying "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about".
The funniest response I've read to this type of reasoning went something like this: a family gathering; topic of privacy came up; boomer-type trotted out the "nothing to hide" line; younger relative asked them if they enjoy a particular type of sexual intercourse with their spouse; red faces and looks of horror; the asker reminded everyone that privacy is important and it doesn't mean one is doing anything wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The world is full of and depends on trusted people. You're attacking technology and tools rather than a person that abused their trust to the community. New Bedford being a dump is a non-sequitur; it has as much connection and relevance to the incident as does Flock.
I am not attacking tools or people. This article and my statements aren't attacks. The article is an (alleged) fact, and mine are opinions. I didn't bring up New Bedford. I agree trust is good. I also believe Flock has implemented some auditing tool to flag frivolous searches which is why these cases are popping up. I am not against trust, but verifying those who we trust are trustworthy is important, I think.
If we assume surveillance tools will be use inappropriately, that alone is not justification to do away with it.
As with nearly all tools comes great responsibility.
The same argument can be made for police carrying weapons.
Some places like the UK deny the police weapons but have surveillance up the ass.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wonder how quick this will get removed off the front page YC’s an investor after all
That's not why these are getting flagged. The tech angle is very weak otherwise too similar to the ordinary news. It's not that we don't care or even disagree. I'm not saying this to stir an argument either. I'm just giving an honest answer why the rest of us ordinary folk flag these. They go into the same bin as most of the AI posts. As well, I can't speak for everyone, but the pushback replies to my comment here (i…
They are enabling a different type of mass surveillance than was possible before due to the new tech available today for searching through mass amounts of video and audio, and aggregating data from all sources in one easy to use interface.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s a difference between the abuse potential of ‘a car’ and ‘a nationwide surveillance network that tracks your location any time you’re on a public road’
If she used a GPS tracker instead of an ALPR as alleged, would you be demanding they be outlawed? As it stands they're $20 on Amazon with dozens to choose from.