Live data from Hacker News

Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

techcrunch.com

301–310 of 534 posts

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#302

This breakdown in rule of law is unfortunate. Ideally, this would be handled by, in order of desirability: - Flock decision-makers and customers holding ethics as a priority, and not taking the actions they are due to sense of duty, community, morals etc - Peer pressure resulting in ostracization of Flock execs and decision makers until they stop the unethical behavior - Governments using legislation and law enforcem…

All of this presumes that residents in municipalities with ALPRs don't want them used the way they are. That's not true! These things are broadly pretty popular among a broad set of residents.

I am in favor of them. There is no expectation of privacy in the public setting. I can record anyone on a public street w/o their permission. If these license plate cameras are making the streets safer and helping to reduce crime, why not? Sure there may be some mis-uses here and there, but for the most part they seem to be working and in places where they are deployed, crime is being reduced.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#304

This breakdown in rule of law is unfortunate. Ideally, this would be handled by, in order of desirability: - Flock decision-makers and customers holding ethics as a priority, and not taking the actions they are due to sense of duty, community, morals etc - Peer pressure resulting in ostracization of Flock execs and decision makers until they stop the unethical behavior - Governments using legislation and law enforcem…

My guess is the vast majority of the 80,000 or whatever cameras are uncontested politically. Local board meetings for most towns are boring and quiet affairs, and those are also the most effective venue for these concerns.

If you are a taxpayer in a local jurisdiction with Flock cameras and you want them removed, show up to every single meeting and maximize use of public comment time.

Local government is a place individuals can actually be extremely effective but also almost nobody ever actually does.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#305
post #53

Kind of weird all of those people weren't all up in arms about it before the whole ice thing, why would you be mad that they're tracking somebody else but not mad that they have been slurping up data about your movements and habits this whole time, then monetizing said data by selling it to industries like insurance companies etc.

> Kind of weird all of those people weren't all up in arms about it before the whole ice thing

They weren't being used to build concentration camps before.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I can see how they would be helpful in solving crimes down to minor property damage. I do not want to live in a society where police are watching everything I do in the name of solving minor property damage. "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" is bullshit. I don't do anything illegal in my bathroom, but I do not wish to have a camera in there, even if it could solve a hypothetical crime.

They aren't watching you in the bathroom. They are recording cars on public streets and analyzing the footage.

Why not? Don't you want to stop all the crimes happening in bathrooms too? That would be a logical step if privacy is always an acceptable tradeoff for security (or at least the illusion thereof).

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You won't get to the kind of change you thought you would see until food runs low and the economy stalls. These are no longer impossibles.

Boy is he trying on the latter. Quite impressive just how resilient it seems to be.

It's like when management does something stupid and then engineering works overtime to keeps the system working. Of course management learns nothing and all outside observers don't even notice something went wrong.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#308
post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boy is he trying on the latter. Quite impressive just how resilient it seems to be.

It's like when management does something stupid and then engineering works overtime to keeps the system working. Of course management learns nothing and all outside observers don't even notice something went wrong.

There is a limit to how much engineers working overtime can do to offset management stupidity and when you reach the limit the bottom falls out. Of course then everybody blames the engineers...

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You won't get to the kind of change you thought you would see until food runs low and the economy stalls. These are no longer impossibles.

Boy is he trying on the latter. Quite impressive just how resilient it seems to be.

It's being heavily supported a bubble. We'll see how resilient it is when that pops. As it is, the average person's finances and future prospects are getting worse all the time regardless of whatever the stock market is doing.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#310

This breakdown in rule of law is unfortunate. Ideally, this would be handled by, in order of desirability: - Flock decision-makers and customers holding ethics as a priority, and not taking the actions they are due to sense of duty, community, morals etc - Peer pressure resulting in ostracization of Flock execs and decision makers until they stop the unethical behavior - Governments using legislation and law enforcem…

> 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…

Who is the arbiter of "necessarily trouble"? You? Only people that politically agree with you?
Post reply on HN