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

US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 468 posts

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#351

Post by array_key_first »

loeg wrote: post #300
array_key_first wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's zero proof anywhere that these devices do anything about crimes. How could they? A camera can't lock someone up.

They provide law enforcement timely information about the location of wanted (e.g., stolen) vehicles. Law enforcement can act on that information. If law enforcement does not have that information, it cannot act on it.

Law enforcement can act on that information, but they can do a lot of things. Whether they actually are is a different question.

You're also ignoring the risk here. These devices open up a whooooole new class of mistakes that can be made. There have already been people wrongfully jailed due to surveillance technology.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#352

Post by whyenot »

Cider9986 wrote: post #263

>[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.…

> People are not willing to sacrifice their freedom to save 40,990 people from cars, why should our constant locations be monitored?

We are all different, and I think where we each land on the security privacy continuum will depend on who we are.

This is also true of constitutional rights. The US constitution was written by a small group of wealthy white men. At the time of its drafting, some people were considered property and had no freedom. Women didn't have the same rights as men and were not allowed to vote. Where the framers landed on the security privacy continuum may have been a very different place than many US residents would land today. Rape, murder, property crimes, etc... even today some groups are much more often victims than others. Safety is a much larger concern for some groups than others.

I just feel like you are painting with a very broad brush when it comes to "people."

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#353

Post by toofy »

snerbles wrote: post #262
xracy wrote: 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.

yeah, it doesn’t a lot of thought to realize that societies thrived when they were… social. this has been repeated throughout history.

the people who go off into the woods as uber survivalists or whatever die alone and forgotten from an infected toenail or something equally as stupid while the society full of people down the mountain thrive and people remember each other.

its wild to me how many people are suckered in by the never ending fear mongering that prepper businesses push on them without ever thinking it through.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#356

Post by a456463 »

Couple that with age verification at the OS levels.

Devices tracked on the internet Car tracked outside the house Wifi 7 to track you in the house

Think of the children, the few deaths. Instead we need better policy enforcement. Expire licenses sooner, stricter driving tests, penalties on big tech, breaking up of monopolies, better social care programs, police that are trained in descalating and have empathy towards the community being policed, law makers listening to people and not lobbyists.

All of the right solutions require work. So we are left with an authoritarian fear driven state

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#357

Post by fakedang »

xracy wrote: post #245
gorgonical wrote: post #21

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.

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".

Carries over to countries too :)

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#358

Post by timoth3y »

Cider9986 wrote: post #263

>[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.…

> People are not willing to sacrifice their freedom to save 40,990 people from cars, why should our constant locations be monitored?

It's not binary.

People are absolutely willing to sacrifice some of their freedoms to save lives. That's why we have speed limits, seat-belt and helmet laws, automobile safety regulations, DWI laws, etc.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#359

Post by jkestner »

snerbles wrote: post #262
xracy wrote: 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.

And the cameras can provide them with solar panels.

I’m lucky to live in a walker-friendly neighborhood where most homes aren’t walled off by privacy fences. I’ve found our communal strength in talking to neighbors about the cameras that feed and feed off our fear in isolation. It’s a choice.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#360

Post by Morromist »

snerbles wrote: post #262
xracy wrote: 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.

Heh, I never thought about that but its so true. If society breaks down on the extreme level they anticipate the smart thing to do is probably join a super tight-knit community with lots of young people - maybe the furries or the Amish.
Post reply on HN