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

311–320 of 534 posts

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#311

Post by toephu2 »

cg5280 wrote: post #88
steviedotboston wrote: post #43

This is really bad for all the reasons that people have mentioned (vigilante "justice" never is a good thing) but people have a misplaced understanding of right and wrong here. Flock cameras have helped solve some major crimes, and people will be glad to have this technology around if they are ever a victim.

My confusion stems from the fact that mass surveillance is already pretty normal in major cities. Your face is on a dozen cameras anytime you walk through the grocery store. Your precise location is pinged off cell towers multiple times a day. I understand specific qualms with Flock as a company and how they manage the data, but this libertarian demand for total privacy in public spaces has been long lost and the bee…

If you think USA has mass surveillance you haven't been to Asia (South Korea, Taiwan, China, Singapore, Etc).

I can drive down highways in most cities in the USA without my license plate being read (Flock isn't on highways). Also Flock as integrated mostly just records license plates. It's not recording video 24/7.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#312

Post by john_strinlai »

kilohotel wrote: post #310
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…

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

>You? Only people that politically agree with you?

the next sentence after they mention "necessary trouble" is literally:

"But that only goes as far as to be my opinion."

they are just stating their opinion.

everyone decides when the time for "necessary trouble" is individually, based on their accumulated experience, opinion, etc. no arbiter required, just a critical mass of people with aligning opinions.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#313

Post by toephu2 »

octoberfranklin wrote: post #298

I think it's nuts how nobody seemed to care about this mass surveillance tool until it fell into the hands of the red party. "Just keep electing the blue party" is not a convincing security posture.

License plate readers are hardly mass surveillance.

Why is no one in democratic countries complaining about mass surveillance?

And I mean real cameras (not license plate readers) recording 24/7?

I'm talking about UK, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#314

Post by mv4 »

KittenInABox wrote: post #80
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…

On the contrary I think Americans are reacting about the same as any other set of people would react. There are always going to be people who, as long as their personal lives are stable, they are not going to do anything to put that stability at risk. America is also huge enough that even if one part of the country is having a crisis, millions of fellow citizens will not hear of it or have any 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand co…

The only people whose lives are stable in this economy are the ultra wealthy. Even those who we would normally consider "middle class" are a couple of medical emergencies away from financial ruin. Whole classes of jobs are disappearing.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#315

Post by autoexec »

nathan_compton wrote: post #244
mikestorrent wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Not really a secret. The slogan was "No taxation without representation" not "no taxation." The degree to which legislation in the US is bought by big companies and rarely reflects democratic desires we may be in another "no taxation without representation" era.

Even if the needs of the American people weren't being ignored over the wishes of corporations and the ultra-wealthy in terms of numbers alone we have less representation than ever before because the number of people who are supposed to represent us hasn't kept up with the growing population.

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#316

Post by mv4 »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #206
taurath wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s be clear though - it’s not that Americans are clinging to some deep stability that brings them comfort or relaxation, it’s that they’re on the edge already. The vast vast majority of people are barely able to afford the basics of life, while we’re bombarded with an ever more shameless wealthy elite’s privileges. Politics is like water boiling - it’s just going to be little bubbles at first but all of a sudden i…

Is that really the case? It seems to me that the vast majority in the US can fairly easily afford a fair bit of material luxury, mostly because material luxuries have become incredibly cheap (by historical standards). The trouble is at least in the high population areas (AFAICT) a huge swath of "average" people seem to be stuck living life on a paycheck-to-paycheck basis, renting, no prospect of property ownership, m…

"Among the 37 percent of adults who would not have covered a $400 expense completely with cash or its equivalent, most would pay some other way, although some said that they would be unable to pay the expense at all. For those who could cover the expenses another way, the most common approach was to use a credit card and then carry a balance, and many indicated they would use multiple approaches. However, 13 percent of all adults said they would be unable to pay the expense by any means (table 21), unchanged from 2022 and 2023 but up from 11 percent in 2021"

https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2025-economic-we...

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#317

Post by fc417fc802 »

dirasieb wrote: post #273
fc417fc802 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how did you jump from property damage and arson to speech? I included speech as an example, the same as your bringing up property damage, arson, and financial damage. It seemed relevant given the general shape of what you were expressing. Someone being driven to suicide or unable to pay for medication is not an example of violence. It might be many things but violence is most certainly not one of them. > you cannot…

[flagged]

Your first example, no. That is a threat of violence and is illegal literally everywhere (even in the US). However it does not become "violence" until you commit a physical act.

Your second example is inciting public panic. Again, not violence. And again, illegal literally everywhere (at least AFAIK).

> serious physical harm that's resulting directly from your action

That's the thing, the panic was the direct result. The physical harm was indirect. Once again, words have meanings.

Perhaps you should seek to learn more about the law. You might find that, in addition to words having meaning, society has been dealing with "problematic" behaviors for as long as it has existed and is honestly pretty well equipped for it in general. These things have been catalogued extensively. Referring to everything as "violence" is no better than labeling every other crime "terrorism".

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#319

Post by cindyllm »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #317
dirasieb wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Your first example, no. That is a threat of violence and is illegal literally everywhere (even in the US). However it does not become "violence" until you commit a physical act. Your second example is inciting public panic. Again, not violence. And again, illegal literally everywhere (at least AFAIK). > serious physical harm that's resulting directly from your action That's the thing, the panic was the direct result.…

[dead]

Re: Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras

#320

Post by doomslayer999 »

Car culture in general is an abomination to civil rights. You are tracked by the government, forced to shell out money to predatory insurance companies, and can basically be illegally searched and seized at any point on the roadway. I hope that chinese e-bikes/e-motos will get good enough to where I can use them as my primary form of transport.
Post reply on HN