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

431–440 of 468 posts

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#431

Post by cucumber3732842 »

whyenot wrote: post #352
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 p…

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

I feel very comfortable saying that it has less to do with who you are and more to do with how much you've and/or the people around you have been on the business end of any sort of enforcement system or you've seen how the sausage is made.

There's demographic correlations to an extend of course but I feel very comfortable saying that Popeyes employees and fine gun collectors (i.e. two groups that are probably pretty far apart on just about everything) both land a heck of a lot closer to "the framers" than HN, Reddit and the "western white collar internet" generally does.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#432

Post by alsetmusic »

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".

Guest on most recent Better Offline podcast had a good analogy (this one was actually about AI companies, but fits here):

Dog barking at mail delivery person. Delivery person goes away. Dog thinks barking saved the home.

What a great analogy.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#433

Post by diydsp »

themafia wrote: post #425
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".

Safety is best achieved by layering several systems on top of one another. Would we have such a problem with cameras if the videos were stored locally and not in the cloud?

Cameras move crime around. Wealth inequality raises crime risk, but community cohesion partially buffers that effect.

Happy to provide sources when back at my keeb if rqstd.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#434

Post by [deleted] »

AlBugdy wrote: post #55

Non-US citizens - what's the situation with cameras in public spaces where you live? In my town every 2nd hour or building entrance has a private camera pointed at the street. It's very depressing because the cops don't care - I've asked 2 in a patrol car when there was a mild case of vandalism I witnessed. Technically it's illegal, but nothing happens. The public cameras are on intersection and some bus stops. Too m…

[deleted]

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#435

Post by red-iron-pine »

goatlover wrote: post #364
Morromist wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wonder whether The Walking Dead ever did episodes with a surviving Amish community among it's many spinoffs. Potential problem for them is being outgunned by any aggressive community nearby.

Central PA is the land of guns and chocolate.

that said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Amish already have a small stockpile for practical use cases like hunting and keeping away the English

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#436

Post by pocksuppet »

jamiequint wrote: post #215
schlap wrote: post #178

These 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…

"Cameras don't fix homelessness or addiction or underfunded services. They just make life harder for regular people." In what way do cameras make life harder for regular people? If anything rampant crime (and progressive legal systems' unwillingness to lock up repeat offenders for a long time or at all) makes life much harder for regular people than a camera just sitting there.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, right?

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#439

Post by pocksuppet »

Nasrudith wrote: post #186
yabutlivnWoods wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often what we criminalize is stupid. Giving away food to homeless is a crime in many places. Bad capitalism. Feelings of insecurity are manufactured relative to the danger posed: https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-we-die...

It is antithetical to capitalism as well. The whole basis of capitalism is property rights, and it generally encourages the public doing things themselves instead as private individuals instead of relying upon a bureaucrat or public agency to do everything unless there is a major reason not to. And here they are telling you that you cannot use your own property to help alleviate issues in your community. That sounds…

What you're wrestling with is the difference between what capitalists tell you capitalism is in order to make you support capitalism, and what capitalism actually is. "Do as I say, not as I do" kinda thing.
Post reply on HN