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

Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 534 posts

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#221

Post by ndesaulniers »

Zigurd wrote: post #25
drnick1 wrote: post #20

> While some communities are calling on their cities to end their contracts with Flock, others are taking matters into their own hands. This is absolutely the right thing to do. Remove and smash the cellular modem in your car while you are at it.

The cellular modem is usually on a dedicated fuse. No need for violence unless smashing it would be satisfying.

I took a look at the schematics for the two fuse boxes in my 2023 Chevrolet and _could not tell which/if any_ fuse was dedicated to a cellular modem.

This was in regards to: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/...

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#222

Post by mikestorrent »

yardie wrote: post #58
Waterluvian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not ideal, but it is necessary when the higher-desirability options are not working. What has worried me for years is that Americans would not resort to this level. That things are just too comfortable at home to take that brave step into the firing lines of being on the right side of justice but the wrong side of the law. I'm relieved to see more and more Americans causing necessary trouble. I still think th…

You won't get to the kind of change you thought you would see until food runs low and the economy stalls. The American Revolution was rare in that it didn't need to happen. The Founders were just being giant assholes (j/k). While the French Revolution just a few decades later was more status quo. A lot of starvation and poverty just pushed the population over the edge.

> The American Revolution was rare in that it didn't need to happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proclamation_of_Rebellion

Interestingly y'all Americans pay much more tax now than you did to England back in the day. Turns out King George was right, and it was just about changing who the tax was paid to.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#224

Post by jacquesm »

dirasieb wrote: post #187
jacquesm wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see the equivalence between taking out a surveillance camera that is violating people's privacy with the other things that you list. Arguing like that is simply not going to work.

the person i replied to made a broad "destroying property is not violence" claim, the scope of the conversation is more than just that also, i consider a security camera in a place i live to be security infrastructure, you should not be able to come into a place and do act like a vigilante imposing your view on what should and should not be recorded through force, if you have a problem with the way things work you sh…

It is clear that they were in no way making that claim in the context that you put it in, that's on you, not on them.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#226

Post by mothballed »

margalabargala wrote: post #214
mothballed wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lawlessness is superior to the law of the tyrant. Having lived or spent time in a lot of 3rd world shitholes, including a civil war, I've only really felt freedom in places with lawless lack of government, never places with 'rule of law' -- that always gets twisted for the elite. Of course the same happens in lawless regions, but power is fractured enough, there is a limit on power they can wield against the populace…

This is a personal preference and not some universal axiom. Living under a tyrant at least tends to provide predictability and stability of a sort. The kind of violence that exists in a lawless society tends not to exist. State sanctioned violence, sure, but that's more often than not targeted. Basically, given the choice of Somalia or North Korea, there will be a diversity of opinions as to which someone prefers. I'…

As a note on Somalia: Somalia outside the state-like entities (Somaliland, Puntland, Al-Shaabab caliphate, and FGS / federally controlled somalia) is governed by xeer law.

It's actually not lawless, it just uses a decentralized (polycentric) legal system that is poorly understood by westerners. They've had better outcomes under this system than under democratic government of FGS, which led to all or nothing tribalism influences coming into office.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#227

Post by K0balt »

wrs wrote: post #75
Waterluvian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not ideal, but it is necessary when the higher-desirability options are not working. What has worried me for years is that Americans would not resort to this level. That things are just too comfortable at home to take that brave step into the firing lines of being on the right side of justice but the wrong side of the law. I'm relieved to see more and more Americans causing necessary trouble. I still think th…

What confuses me is that no revolution is required. All we had to do to avoid this was to vote. Voting would still (probably) work.

Unfortunately, studies undertaken by MIT over a decade ago show that when it comes to law writing and passing, voters have no statistically measurable input at the federal level. (Since citizens united)

It’s all just identity politics. I will say that Trump has proven the exception to this rule, enacting a whole lot of policy that circumvents the law and has real effects. (And is likely mostly unconstitutional if actually put to the test)

So while locally, voting can be powerful, it’s mostly bread and circuses at the federal level since regulatory capture is bipartisan.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#228

Post by bezier-curve »

margalabargala wrote: post #202
bezier-curve wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where in the Constitution does it require us to give up our privacy to private companies with little oversight? Seems like there's contention here. https://journals.law.unc.edu/ncjolt/blogs/under-surveillance...

The person you replied to is saying usage Flock is violating the constitution.

I was confused by the "barking up the wrong tree" opener because the parent commenter was not contradicting that line of thinking either. Though destroying property is not going to get anyone anywhere, that I can agree with if that's GP's point.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#229

Post by fc417fc802 »

bee_rider wrote: post #173
AlexandrB wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many homeowners install mystery-meat Chinese cameras on their houses that feed the data God knows where? Should their homes be vandalized too for their lack of concern for the community?

Rather, a community could pass a law to prevent persistent filming of public locations—why not, right?

Well, not in the US since filming in public is (at least AFAIK) constitutionally protected. It's weird though, somehow two party consent for audio recording (even in public) seems to be accepted by the courts. Although it's entirely possible that I have a misunderstanding.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#230

Post by amrocha »

overfeed wrote: post #216
unclad5968 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who can I vote for that will stop flock cameras from being installed?

Badger your city council, work with like-minded residents in a way that can credibly threaten their re-elections, find and support privacy-conscious candidates who won't sign-onto Flock's agenda, create ads based on council meetings when councilors support surveillance in a way most voters will reject. Put their quotes on billboard with their picture, etc

Ok, you do all that work at home and manage to block flock in your area. It doesn’t matter because the next city over where you work installed them so you get tracked anyway.

Then 2 years later a new city council gets elected and they install flock cameras in your city too. You can never get rid of them because it already passed and nobody wants to relitigate the same thing every couple of years.

Local politics does not work here.

Post reply on HN