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

441–450 of 468 posts

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#441

Post by Manuel_D »

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.…

> that's still asking people to give up their most sensitive freedom, the right to move without being tracked, for speculative gains.

It might come as a shock, but there's nothing guaranteeing private movement in public in the US. It is totally legal for people to whip out their phone and start filming you in public. People can set up cameras on their property and film the road outside their house.

In fact, many of the municipalities that have "ditched" still have loads of flock cameras that they cant remove because they're on private property owned by the property owners.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#442

Post by mathieudombrock »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #435
goatlover wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The Amish are generally pacifist.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#443

Post by themafia »

diydsp wrote: post #433
themafia wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Cameras move crime around.

Yea, so the the next layer is, why are people committing crimes? I've made it clear I don't think you can just "turn on safety."

> Wealth inequality raises crime risk

So would we have that big of a problem with cameras everywhere if they recorded locally and we had UBI?

> but community cohesion partially buffers that effect.

How do you measure "community cohesion?"

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#444

Post by Manuel_D »

text0404 wrote: post #293
jamiequint wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Single example is worthless. Is there a pattern of this happening far more often? Overall, do fewer people get incorrectly arrested or detained as a result of this technology, or more.

Such great questions. Maybe we should answer them before building a massive, privately-owned, nationwide surveillance apparatus with taxpayer money.

https://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2026/03/05/new-analysis-rtcc-...

Seattle apparently tripled likelihood of perpetrators being identified.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#445

Post by pocksuppet »

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…

Public cameras in Germany are widely assumed to be illegal, although in reality, they aren't.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#446

Post by bob8490 »

Manuel_D wrote: post #441
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.…

> that's still asking people to give up their most sensitive freedom, the right to move without being tracked, for speculative gains. It might come as a shock, but there's nothing guaranteeing private movement in public in the US. It is totally legal for people to whip out their phone and start filming you in public. People can set up cameras on their property and film the road outside their house. In fact, many of t…

There is this, which isn't enough but makes it clear the door is not shut on this argument.

https://law.stanford.edu/2018/06/22/supreme-court-defends-pr...

> The Court decided that a person has a “legitimate expectation of privacy in the record of his physical movements.”

and

> "A person does not surrender all Fourth Amendment protection by venturing into the public sphere."

In my view, the individual right to document anything one may observe in public is significantly different from tax dollars being spent to record everything that's visible in public, analyze it with AI, and then cross-reference it across an extended period to track the movements of law abiding Americans.

It's unreasonable to think you won't appear in someone's camera lens at any given moment while out in public. It's not at all unreasonable to assume your patterns of life won't be tagged and cataloged for weeks on end, for whatever reason, by a private or public entity.

You're right there's not enough precedent here yet, but we shouldn't let the current precedent of there being almost no regulation on this stuff remain.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#447

Post by mystraline »

goatlover wrote: post #370
mystraline wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor is the Butlerian Jihad.

Just need a giant worm god to put us on the right path.

"Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them." - Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam, Dune

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#448

Post by text0404 »

Manuel_D wrote: post #441
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.…

> that's still asking people to give up their most sensitive freedom, the right to move without being tracked, for speculative gains. It might come as a shock, but there's nothing guaranteeing private movement in public in the US. It is totally legal for people to whip out their phone and start filming you in public. People can set up cameras on their property and film the road outside their house. In fact, many of t…

Doubt that anyone is concerned with a random person catching a portion of your face while they're taking a picture in public. Instead, it's opposition to being tracked over time by a centralized entity like a private company or government agencies.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#449

Post by text0404 »

Manuel_D wrote: post #444
text0404 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such great questions. Maybe we should answer them before building a massive, privately-owned, nationwide surveillance apparatus with taxpayer money.

https://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2026/03/05/new-analysis-rtcc-... Seattle apparently tripled likelihood of perpetrators being identified.

That PR article doesn't answer the questions, and raises more:

- Why didn't SPD commission an independent study?

- What kinds of crimes were studied? Is this catching jaywalkers or homicides?

- Only mentions arrests. What about convictions? How are victims receiving justice?

- Where's the data and the reproducible methodology?

- How many people were tracked who didn't commit any crime at all?

There's so much wrong with that article that it's hard to come to any verifiable conclusions about the efficacy of the program. And again, doesn't answer any of the original questions.

Re: US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology

#450

Post by islandfox100 »

gretch wrote: post #210
FireBeyond wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch for Flock footage to be "unavailable"/"deleted"/"corrupt" just as often as bodycam footage is.

That's right. And also just like the missing epstein footage. Because it's a social problem, not a technology problem. At the same time, just because these instances of "missing" tape happen, does not mean that body cams and jailhouse CCTV are useless. We would not take those away. Likewise for the future drone footage

The categorization of the problem isn't an excuse to propogate and intensify the problem. The tech should not be used until the problem is resolved.
Post reply on HN