Getting involved in local decision making is great, but theres always wire cutters and spray paint for those more inclined on a direct approach. Resisting an the rule of unjust law is always acceptable.
US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
371–380 of 468 posts
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#372>[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.…
FYI when cops arrive at a homicide scene, they don't go looking for the FLOCK camera's, they go looking for people who have RING cameras and businesses that have security cameras. Anything that is within sight of the crime scene is where they start. If you think FLOCK is an issue, you're barking up the wrong tree. You can remove all the FLOCK camera's you want and it won't change the already overwhelming passive surv…
they absolutely positively do both.
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
COVID makes it spike up (after a months long downward trend long before the cameras), not down. Nation-wide, incidentally. The cameras were added where the black rectangle is here: https://imgur.com/a/i00Gna0
There are two nearly identical peaks on this chart. The trough between them is Covid. I’m not seeing anything I can call a Covid spike
well that's because you're discussing in good faith
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#374Getting involved in local decision making is great, but theres always wire cutters and spray paint for those more inclined on a direct approach. Resisting an the rule of unjust law is always acceptable.
A little direct action a day, keeps the surveillance state away
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm very in favor of speed & redlight cameras and don't have a particular problem with license plate trackers. I think we partisan-ize far too many things nowadays, unfortunately.
People like you expressing sentiments like that are exactly how we got here. You want them to go hard on some particular issue. Save the children, get rid of the drugs, arrest the terrorists, save the planet, there's always some justification that's hard to argue against in abstract but think a few steps ahead "what would happen if everyone did it". At the limit tolerating this sort of thing for even a fraction of pe…
Consider that we should just do the dumb and stupid thing that statsig reduces traffic deaths rather than being galaxy-brained about it.
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's clearly not a covid effect https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/sf-car-breakins/
The data is open, and so we don't have to do the visual reasoning off an imperfect graph. SF Chronicle has done a pretty rare (but I think good journalistic practice) of specifying the source of the data: https://data.sfgov.org/Public-Safety/Police-Department-Incid... First to match the graph you make sure you pick 'Larceny - From Vehicle' only (there are some others one might argue matter) and ensure you're only cou…
Your analysis also supports a covid trough, not a covid peak and certainly no covid effect. I agree with other commentators suggesting that flock cameras are not the full or even most of the story, but absolutely disagree with the GP that car break-ins are some identifiable covid phenom or that the decrease is merely a post-covid return to normalcy.
Hopefully there was nothing wrong with posting a news article with a graph instead of doing the data analysis myself.
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
They install them where the data show that people are running red lights.
Where the data shows people are getting caught running red lights. Which isn't necessarily where the most incidents are.
In my experience it's the rich areas chock full o' Karens that get the latest and greatest in jackbootery because they have all the money for the new hotness, no real problems to divert their attention and almost nobody who's ever been on the business end of government enforcement so they don't see any real problem with dispensing it at the drop of a hat.
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#378Earlier 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?
Because today it will be used as a first responder. Tomorrow a police officer will suggest that these drones (that we are already using successfully) could be very useful for checking up on that "dangerous" neighborhood.
I'm not really worried about the police. There's mountains of well reinforced legal precedent restricting them. Sure they have violence, but they kind of need to show up to do that. All the other stuff they do runs up against your rights which are really well established. Even the "civil" traffic stuff is pretty hard fought, comparatively.
Every other civil enforcer can basically fine you on a whim and then your appeal goes into a system that makes jim crow look impartial. So yeah, I'm not worried about the cops. I'm worried about the zoning office "fixing" a budget shortfall by fining people for unpermitted kiddie pools or whatever and in the 10yr it takes to get smacked down in court they'll have stolen the property of a ton of people. I'm dead serious. However bad you think it could be reality is worse. These non-LEO departments make the most sloppy podunk sheriff's office look like the FBI.
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe home depot themselves put up these cameras.
Cringe. I'll try to shop at other hardware stores going forward, thanks.
Meanwhile here I am shopping at Home Depot because they actively fight against the "thou shalt pay a licensed..." laws and codes that the industry groups lobby for.
There's no winning.
Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
#380These companies build this tech in SF and Seattle, cities with some of the gnarliest public safety problems in the country, then turn around and sell it to smaller towns where it does more harm than good. Most places in America don't have problems that surveillance solves. They have problems they already know about and won't act on. Cameras don't fix homelessness or addiction or underfunded services. They just make l…
> These companies build this tech in SF and Seattle Flock's headquarters and largest offices are in Atlanta. They also have an office in Boston. Ring's headquarters were in Santa Monica until post-acquisition they moved to Hawthorne, CA. Arlo's offices are in Carlsbad and San Jose. Ok, finally an office in the Bay Area (one of two main offices), but still not San Francisco.
>They also have an office in Boston.
That would be one of my seconnd pick for talent pool if I wanted to get at people who'd be exited to build 1984. Behind DC, of course.