Live data from Hacker News

US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

cnet.com

341–350 of 468 posts

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#341
post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this same argument ANY police makes life hard for regular people because they sometimes fuck up, so let's just get rid of police too. What's the worst that could happen.

https://x.com/jeffmklein/status/1430876370175987712

Luckily we don't have to use the poor as a crutch for this argument. Public camera networks capture everyone sleeping on the sidewalk, regardless of their income level.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Japan is exporting it's AI-enhanced crime prediction platform across LatAm after successfully deploying it in Tokyo [0]. Japan is doing similar work to analyze financial transactions [1]. South Korea has also deployed a similar surveillance platform called Dejaview [2]. Even Finland has been deploying surveillance camera fusion centers [3] The brutal reality is everyone is doing this and there's nothing you can do ab…

> The brutal reality is everyone is doing this and there's nothing you can do about it. Maybe not me personally, but society can.

Depending on the society.

Societies that are strongly collectivist in nature tend to align closer with expanded state powers and don't view it as an affront.

The techno-individualist subculture that is common on HN and Reddit is that - a subculture.

Techno-individualism cannot coexist with collectivist culture where the primacy of the state is held as sacrosanct and supreme.

And now that countries like Russia [0], Iran [1], and China [2] have been expanding hybrid warfare capabilities across the West - especially now that Europe is now expeiencing the largest conventional war since WW2 - we need to recognize that we are no long in a state of peace.

[0] - https://www.ft.com/content/2084e87d-d491-4852-8449-f90b73d47...

[1] - https://www.ft.com/content/adc3e954-5928-471b-b7f2-e4385bbca...

[2] - https://www.ft.com/content/63720831-8805-497d-8145-1713e450a...

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#343

Musician-turning-tech anarchist (?) Benn Jordan is making a very interesting series of videos about Flock cameras, their poor safety, and their gray-area interfacing with local governments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMIwNiwQewQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU1-uiUlHTo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ I recommend them.

Wow thank you for sharing this I had no idea this guy existed! There’s more of us techno anarchists out there apparently!

Yeah I discovered this guy because a video about Aphex Twin appeared on my feed.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#344

Musician-turning-tech anarchist (?) Benn Jordan is making a very interesting series of videos about Flock cameras, their poor safety, and their gray-area interfacing with local governments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMIwNiwQewQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU1-uiUlHTo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ I recommend them.

Someone complaining about local governments having data while directing them to YouTube, whose owner does surveillance at a scale far exceeding all local governments of all countries combined, is ironic. Why don’t these people use Peertube at least. Fact of the matter is they’d like to personally profit off the same nonsense they complain about. This person has a million subscribers, they aren’t some random whistlebl…

Hasan Piker owns a house. Lets all complain about that too!

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is much less concerning to me than mass surveillance. If someone calls 911 and you need to send a first responder, why not send a drone to get there faster while a person is on their way?

Yeah this doesn't bother me in any way, shape, or form. We already have manned aircraft that respond to such things, unmanned aircraft are a strictly better solution. It makes sense for police and it makes even more sense for fire. An aircraft can arrive at the site of a reported fire while firemen are still buckling their pants.

There is an endless list of infractions to civil liberties that would "Make sense for police".

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#346
post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where the data shows people are getting caught running red lights. Which isn't necessarily where the most incidents are.

If they only installed them based on collision/injury data, and that data identified mostly poor areas, you would be ok with it? Because this is what the data finds over and over. The people most harmed by red light running are the poor people who live in these neighborhoods.

> Because this is what the data finds over and over.

So link it.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#347
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the drones are "providing information" to the police, it's only a matter of time before their AI hallucinates something that gets someone killed. We've already seen AI gun detection services that report things like Doritos bags as guns.

OTOH it will provide more surveillance of the police themselves. Humans are also bad at gun detection (sometimes willfully so) and this provides another check.

How exactly does this provide more surveillance of the police themselves? I've done about ten FOIA lawsuits against police departments and it's laughable to think that they won't just lock footage away and exempt it from the public's eyes. Probably through a trade secret exemption because private companies are involved.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#348
post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where the data shows people are getting caught running red lights. Which isn't necessarily where the most incidents are.

If they only installed them based on collision/injury data, and that data identified mostly poor areas, you would be ok with it? Because this is what the data finds over and over. The people most harmed by red light running are the poor people who live in these neighborhoods.

Maybe!

I might question the benefits of making the poor area even poorer via fines they likely can't afford. I might wonder if there are confounding factors like poorly maintained roads and vehicles at play. I might wonder if the yellow lights have the same timing as in the suburbs.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#349
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think his comment about "why dogs might provide actual neighborhood safety" is a good reminder that the thing that makes communities safe is "knowing your neighbors." You don't get safety by building a castle with a moat and a million cameras. You get safety by building a community with context that can respond without having to just "react" to the 6s version of "what happened".

I'm reminded of prepper forum discussions. Where some do little more than hoard supplies, weapons and gadgets yet don't network and build communities. In an actual societal breakdown scenario these isolated individuals will become loot drops for others who actually band together.

I agree that there is a parallel between governments and corporations multiplying surveillance and preppers impractically multiplying gadgets. I perceive both to be responding to some sort of psychological issue relating to control or insecurity, not to be practically pursuing resilience.

A government with aggressive surveillance ambitions but a decaying police department and justice system looks to me very much like the guy with a mountain of guns and ammo but no parallel investment in something like battlefield medicine. Whatever you're telling yourself about the reason for what you're doing, it is manifestly not correct, at least going by other investments I would expect to see and find neglected.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#350

>[1] Would crime go up, down or stay the same if all surveillance cameras were removed? The answer to that is the only one that matters. At least 40,990 [2] innocent people died in the US in 2023, without significant outcry - that is, on the road, in car accidents. People in the US clearly value the freedom of driving over the deaths of innocent people. In 2023, there were an estimated 19,800 [3] homicides in the US.…

To rich people, the privacy attack isn't an issue. We already track their private jets, how is this any different?

>We already track their private jets

After the Elon Musk and Taylor Swift outcry rich people can now exempt themselves from being tracked

https://gizmodo.com/congress-just-made-it-way-harder-to-trac...

Post reply on HN